Critical education in resource and environmental management: Learning and empowerment for a sustainable future

Journal of Environmental Management (1999) 57, 85–97 Article No. jema.1999.0289, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Critical education in resource and environmental management: Learning and empowerment for a sustainable future A. Diduck Changing from current patterns of resource use to a sustainable and equitable economy is a complex and intractable problem. This paper suggests that critical education may form part of the solution. Critical environmental assessment (EA) education, the model explored in this paper, offers a tool for resource and environmental managers to use in managing public involvement processes. This model challenges current patterns of resource use and addresses criticisms of public involvement processes. Critical EA education, involving both cognitive development and personal empowerment, focuses on critical intelligence, problem solving and social action. The concept is offered as a means to facilitate and improve public involvement and, thereby, empower local communities to take greater control of resource use decisions affecting their lives. Positive implications of critical EA education for change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict, which are four enduring themes in resource and environmental management, are discussed in the paper. The implications include: cognitive development and personal empowerment at the level of local resource communities; simplification of the often complex discourse encountered in resource management; reduction in feelings of powerlessness often experienced by members of the public in environmental assessment scenarios; a reduction of ignorance and indeterminacy regarding resource management issues; conflict resolution at the cognitive level; and, clarification of the opposing values, interests or actions at the heart of a conflict.  1999 Academic Press

Keywords: critical education, public involvement, environmental assessment, sustainable development.

Introduction This paper describes a model of non-formal adult education for use in the context of public involvement in resource and environmental management. The model, entitled critical environmental assessment (EA) education, challenges current patterns of resource use and addresses a significant problem in resource management, namely deficiencies in public involvement processes. The purpose of the paper is two-fold: to describe the model and examine it in relation to four enduring themes in resource and environmental management, namely change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict. This exercise forges critical EA education into a more robust concept by exposing it to management realities 0301–4797/99/100085+13 $30.00/0

and further develops its basic conceptual framework.

Current patterns of resource use It is reasonable to expect fair-minded people to disagree on the nature of current patterns of resource use. As Orr (1994) commented, an economist and an ecologist will likely perceive different aspects of reality when observing the state of interactions between human and natural systems. Placing faith in technological change and elastic technical substitution, the economist (at least of the neoclassical variety) may see unlimited potential for economic growth. The ecologist,

Department of Geography, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Canada, N2L 3G1 Received 15 June 1998; accepted 11 March 1999

 1999 Academic Press

86

A. Diduck

relying on systems thinking, knowledge of thermodynamics and a sense of place in the ecosystem, may see an entirely different picture, one of unsustainable resource exploitation, climate change, fragile ecosystems and alienation between humans and nature. This paper adopts more of the ecological perspective. It accepts that current patterns of resource development cannot be extended to all currently living people, or to future generations (Daly and Cobb, 1989; Costanza, 1991; Goodland and Daly, 1995). Moreover, it accepts that environmental pollution and resource exploitation can be justified under conventional resource development (Goodland et al., 1989) and this is manifest in a diverse array of environmental crises that challenges human and ecological well being: ‘If today is a typical day on planet earth, we will lose 116 square miles of rain forest, or about an acre a second. We will lose another 72 square miles to encroaching deserts, the results of human mismanagement and overpopulation. We will lose 40 to 250 species, and no one knows whether the number is 40 or 250. Today the human population will increase by 250 000. And today we will add 2700 tons of chlorofluorocarbons and 15 million tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Tonight the earth will be a little hotter, its waters more acidic, and. . .’ (Orr, 1994, 1).

A sustainable future Just as fair-minded people could reasonably disagree on the nature of current patterns of resource use, they could also disagree on an appropriate vision of the future. Sustainability is a fluid and emergent concept and has attracted considerable discussion and criticism (e.g. Dovers, 1993; Sachs, 1993). However, internationally it has become the principal aim of environmental policy (Glasbergen, 1996), and for many resource and environmental managers it has become an appropriate vision of the future (Mitchell, 1997). Various models of sustainability can be found in the literature but those that follow a three component or a multiple capital framework (Hardi et al., 1997) typically

include elements relating to equity, empowerment, social cohesion and participation (e.g. Goodland and Daly, 1995). One aspect of participation relevant to sustainability is public involvement in resource and environmental management. Public involvement in resource management functions is of fundamental importance because it is consistent with the principles of participatory democracy, improves planning and decision making, helps resolve conflicts and makes difficult political decisions more acceptable (Pateman, 1972; Gibson, 1988; 1993; Sinclair and Diduck, 1995; Lummis, 1996; Mitchell, 1997). Further, numerous resource management practices and processes recognize the value of public involvement, e.g. integrated resource management (Born and Sonzogni, 1995; Margerum and Born, 1995), adaptive environmental management (Walters, 1986; Lee, 1993; Holling, 1995), co-management (Berkes, 1989; Palsson, 1998) and environmental assessment (Gibson, 1993; Roberts, 1995; Wood, 1995). However, in recent years various dimensions of public involvement have come under criticism. Wood (1995) identified inefficiency created by excessive delay as the principle criticism made of EA systems with extensive public involvement requirements. Kagonge (1996) raised questions of fairness by arguing that participation does not necessarily include wide representation from affected communities. Diduck and Sinclair (1997a) presented a case study in which effectiveness of the public’s involvement was questioned both by proponent and government officials.

Education as part of the solution If current patterns of resource use are unacceptable, and if sustainability is an appropriate vision of the future, by what means can society move from the present towards the vision? A detailed and comprehensive response to this question is well beyond the scope of this paper, but a reasonable survey of the alternatives would likely include discussion of resource and environmental management, education and learning, and social and political theory. Critical EA education, the model explored in this paper, draws on

Learning for a sustainable future

each of these broad disciplines and offers a tool for resource and environmental managers to use in managing public involvement processes. Critical EA education is not intended as a departure from, or alternative to, various concepts found in the environmental education literature, such as education for biodiversity and education for sustainable development. Rather, it is an attempt to apply selected concepts from environmental education (along with ideas from transformative learning and participatory democracy) in a new context, namely public involvement in resource and environmental management.

Towards a conceptual framework Critical EA education was initially conceived during a study which explored education and learning in the context of an environmental assessment of a major water development project in southern Manitoba, Canada. Diduck and Sinclair (1997a; 1997b) identified correlations of varying strength among a number of variables: • readership of documents presenting the pro-development position; • understanding of the pro-development position; • understanding of the EA process; • critical thinking towards the prodevelopment position; • critical thinking towards the EA process; • whether or not the participant was involved in the public hearings; and • level of involvement in the public hearings. Further analysis, adopting a critical approach to education (Freire, 1970; 1985), suggested additional variables that may be important in the process: • understanding of and critical thinking towards positions that are counter to the dominant, pro-development position; • understanding of and critical thinking towards the counter positions; • quality of public involvement in the public hearings and other aspects of the EA process; • understanding of and critical thinking towards interests and structures underlying the positions presented in the case;

• dialogue and cooperation among participants with similar interests; and • efforts to effect personal and social change. A conceptual framework was built around the variables noted above. However, it became apparent that the framework revealed a need to more fully account for learning processes in adulthood and the forms of knowledge most compatible with social change for a sustainable future. The following discussion begins to address these concerns and continues the conceptualization of critical EA education. As noted above, critical EA education was initially conceived in the context of environmental assessment. This was a convenient forum because most EA processes include a public involvement component and recognize the value of sustainable development. In addition, a number of observers had begun to discuss adult education and learning in the context of public involvement in EA (e.g. Sinclair and Diduck, 1995; Webler et al., 1995; Regnier and Penna, 1996). The position taken in this paper, however, is that critical EA education, as a model, is portable to other resource management processes that include public involvement and are targeted to sustainable development. Such processes provide excellent opportunities for non-formal adult education, defined here as education for adults that occurs outside of traditional school settings, such as activities organized by environmental non-governmental organizations (Merriam and Caffarella, 1991).

Purposes The essence of critical EA education is education and learning that facilitates public involvement in resource management and, thereby, empowers local communities to take greater control of resource use decisions that directly affect them. In the model, involvement in the civic life of the community is considered a virtue. As Orr (1994) described, this is consistent with classical conceptions of democracy. For the Greeks and Romans, ‘[v]irtue was regarded, first, as an exercise in participation and fulfillment of the obligations of membership in a community that was embedded in a larger cosmic order’ (Orr,

87

88

A. Diduck

1994, p. 61). It is also consistent with modern conceptions of the citizen’s role in community governance (Mill, 1861; Roberts, 1995). Further, it is consistent with current participatory democracy theory, which asserts that participation in civic decisions is moral because it permits the expression of individual attributes and capacities, and facilitates cooperative social interactions (Pateman, 1972; Gibson, 1975). Participation in the civic life of the community has been extended to resource and environmental management by Nelson (1995a) and Nelson and Serafin (1996). Their ‘civics approach’ has been offered as an alternative to the reductionist, ‘command and control’ approach to environmental management and decision making. A liberationist approach (O’Neill, 1981), such as the critical education described by Paulo Friere (Freire, 1970; 1985), should be adopted in conducting critical EA education. Whatever its formal structure or precise purpose, the objectives of critical education are critical consciousness and the development of appropriate skills and competencies related to social action (Mackie, 1980; Aronowitz, 1993; Heaney, 1995). As Greenall Gough and Robottom (1993) described, critical education empowers learners to participate in a democratic transformation of society. Critical education has been criticized for, among other things, neglecting gender issues, taking an overly optimistic view of agency, relying on simplistic conceptions of power and overlooking social context (Gore, 1992; hooks, 1993; Heaney, 1995). However, it has numerous advocates (e.g. Freire, 1973; Gibson, 1986; Young, 1989; Hart, 1990; Mezirow, 1990; Shor, 1993; Welton, 1993) and has been applied in the environmental dimension at theoretical levels, in empirical studies, to formal education for youth, and to non-formal adult education (e.g. Greig et al., 1987; Pepper, 1987; Robottom, 1987; Viezzer, 1992; Fien, 1993; Greenall Gough and Robottom, 1993; Clover et al., 1998). There is also a small literature on the application of a critical approach to non-formal adult education in the specific context of environmental and resource management. These studies relate primarily to conducting research within a participatory paradigm (Ibikunle-Johnson, 1989; Merrifield, 1993; Guevara, 1996), but

include a report of managing public involvement in environmental assessment (Regnier and Penna, 1996). Along with facilitating critical consciousness and developing skills and competencies related to social action, the purposes of critical EA education should include improving instrumental and communicative competence and developing more functional frames of reference. These ideas are adopted from Mezirow’s transformative learning, which attempts to provide a comprehensive theory of how adults learn (Mezirow, 1981; Merriam and Caffarella, 1991; Mezirow, 1991; Clark, 1993; Mezirow, 1994; 1996). Instrumental competence refers to learning how to control or manipulate the environment, i.e. how to cope with the external world. Communicative competence involves trying to understand what someone means when they communicate with you. It helps the learner negotiate meanings, intentions and values, rather than merely accepting those of others. A frame of reference consists of two dimensions: meaning perspectives (broad epistemic, psychological and sociocultural predispositions); and, meaning schemes (specific beliefs, feelings, attitudes and value judgements). Frames of reference are more functional when they become more inclusive, differentiating, permeable, critically reflective and integrative of experience. Transformations in frames of reference occur through critical reflection on the underlying assumptions of the various elements of the meaning perspective or meaning scheme. The most significant transformations occur when elements of the meaning perspective are transformed through critical self-reflection. These are often precipitated by a disorienting dilemma or a series of smaller transitions, followed by the phases summarized in Table 1. Critical self-reflection regarding sociocultural presuppositions (such as social norms, ideologies, and philosophies) may involve a critique of alienating social forms and may result in collective social action. Early versions of transformative learning theory drew criticism for relying on Habermas’ concepts of instrumental, communicative and emancipatory knowledge, while failing to incorporate the social critique and consequent demand for collective action

Learning for a sustainable future Table 1. A process of critical self-reflection (after Mezirow, 1981; 1994) 1. A disorienting dilemma or a series of smaller transitions. 2. Self-examination. 3. Critical assessment of role assumptions and social expectations. 4. Recognition that one’s problem may be shared by others in the community. 5. Exploring new patterns of behaviour. 6. Building competence and self-confidence in those new patterns. 7. Planning a course of action. 8. Gaining knowledge and skills for implementing one’s plan. 9. Provisional efforts to try new roles and gain feedback. 10. Reintegration with a new perspective.

that are inherent in Habermas’ work (Collard and Law, 1989; Hart, 1990; Pietrykowski, 1996). They were also criticized for misapplying certain concepts from Freire’s critical pedagogy (Collard and Law, 1989; Tennant, 1994; Pietrykowski, 1996). Recent statements on transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1994; 1996) have begun to address these concerns and some writers have suggested that transformative learning holds significant potential for moving towards a comprehensive theory of adult learning (Merriam and Caffarella, 1991; Merriam, 1993). Further, informal learning that occurs during public involvement in resource management functions reveals evidence of dimensions of transformative theory, including instrumental and communicative learning (e.g. McMullin and Nielson, 1991; Sullivan et

al., 1996; Moote et al., 1997; Marshall, 1998; Owen, 1998) and changes in meaning schemes and perspectives (e.g. Webler et al., 1995; Daniels and Walker, 1996; Regnier and Penna, 1996).

Methods The methodological implications of Freire’s critical education have received considerable attention in the literature (e.g. Aronowitz, 1993; Shor, 1993; Gibson, 1994). Freire viewed education as a social interaction that can either empower or domesticate the learner (Shor, 1993). He placed a premium on democratic dialogue that shifts the center of the learning process from the facilitator (or teacher) to the learner. In the Freirean method (summarized in Table 2), the facilitator poses critical problems for inquiry relating to important features of learner experience. This allows the participants to see their thoughts and language reflected in the course of study. The dialogical approach invites learners to think critically about the subject matter being discussed, related doctrines, the learning process itself and society. It also challenges learners and facilitators to empower themselves for social change and to advance democracy and equality (Freire, 1970; Shor, 1993). This occurs through praxis, a cycle of action–reflection–action (Freire, 1970; Lather, 1986; Hall, 1993; Heaney, 1995). A participatory, dialogical and actionoriented approach, such as that referred to

Table 2. Descriptors of Freirean method (after Shor, 1993; Gibson, 1994) Descriptors Participatory Multi-cultural Situated Critical Democratic Dialogical Desocializational Research oriented Activist Affective Reliant on praxis

Conceptual definitions Participants are involved in making their own education. Cultural diversity of society is recognized and accepted. The ‘course’ content is situated in participant thought and language. Discussion encourages self-reflection and social reflection. Discourse is constructed mutually by both the facilitator and the participants. The basic format is based on dialogue around problems posed in the class setting. Participants are desocialized from passivity in the classroom setting. The facilitator researches the speech, behaviour and cognitive development of the participants, while the participants research problems posed in class. The classroom is active and interactive. The dialogue is interested in a broad development of human feeling. The process relies on the action–reflection–action learning cycle.

89

90

A. Diduck

above, is also found in critical environmental education. Echoing the Freirean reliance on praxis, Pepper’s (1987, p. 74) view was that meaningful social and ecological change through environmental education could ‘only come about through concurrent development of theory and practice’. Relying on the McLuhan observation that ‘the medium is the message’, Greig et al. (1987) argued that method of instruction must be consistent with curriculum content. If environmental education places a premium on democracy, participation, empowerment and action, the learning process must, therefore, be democratic, participatory, empowering and active. In the area of non-formal adult education, Clover et al. (1998) (also see Clover, 1995; 1996) reported on a successful model of critical environmental education that is congruent methodologically with the Freirean approach. Critical EA education, therefore, adopts the participatory approach to instruction summarized in the foregoing discussion.

Content In critical EA education, improving instrumental competence should mean developing deeper understandings of the relationships among natural and human systems. Aldo Leopold provided insight into the nature of this type of instrumental learning. For Leopold, the very purpose of education should be to guide us in the direction of a Land Ethic that values harmony with nature, nonmaterialistic self-actualization and recognition of the intrinsic value of the natural environment (Leopold, 1966; Pearce and Turner, 1990). For Leopold, education should teach us our place in the ecosystem and how to work with ‘ecological mechanisms’ to create mental and material wealth. It should also teach us that if we fail to work with those mechanisms, humanity would ultimately be destroyed. Orr (1994) provided a set of concept areas for education to guide us toward an ethic such as that described by Leopold. Generally, he advocated for an ‘ecoliteracy’ that involves, among other things, an understanding of the connection between thermodynamics and the human economy, the basic principles of ecology and physics, environmental ethics, and

Table 3. General concept areas for environmental education (Orr, 1994) Environmental education concept areas • • • • • • • • • • •

The laws of thermodynamics The basic principles of ecology Carrying capacity Energetics Least-cost, end-use analysis Limits of technology Appropriate scale Sustainable agriculture and forestry Steady-state economics Environmental ethics Practical knowledge about one’s local ecosystem

practical knowledge about one’s local ecosystem (Table 3). Critical EA education adopts the notion of ecoliteracy but also accepts that progressive ecological change can only be achieved in a dialectical relationship with social change (Pepper, 1987). Education that improves our instrumental competence will, therefore, also include learning about the social justice dimensions of development. It will be a holistic and moral education that explores linkages among environment, race, gender and poverty issues (Greig et al., 1987; Courtney Hall, 1997; Clover et al., 1998). Consistent with education for sustainability (Disinger, 1990; Sterling and EDET Group, 1992, cited in Palmer, 1998) and education for the environment (Fien, 1993), critical EA education should improve communicative competence. This will involve education that facilitates socio-political empowerment (Rocha, 1997) to create a future that is less tied to the dynamics of industrial capitalism. Friedmann (1987) argued that this involves two broad goals: collective selfreliance in development and the recovery of political community in civil society, referring to that aspect of a society that organizes itself autonomously from the state and the market (Friedmann, 1987; Lummis, 1996; Miller, 1997). In critical EA education, improving communicative competence should also involve education that helps move self-conceptions along the spectrum from market rationality to social rationality. Market rationality is grounded in a ‘metaphysics of possessive individualism’, in which the individual is assumed to be logically prior to society and the

Learning for a sustainable future

satisfaction of material needs is the principal reason people live in social groups (Friedmann, 1987, p. 20). Social rationality assumes that social formations are logically prior to the individual and separate identity as a person is derived from membership in a specific group (Friedmann, 1987). For Gibson (1975), the conception of human nature underlying social rationality is that humans are not mere consumers of satisfactions. He argued that the basic human personality is compatible with collective life and will express itself ‘in increasingly desirable ways in terms of both individual and social interest if it is nurtured and allowed to grow’ (Gibson, 1975, p. 23). In the specific context of environmental assessment, the education described above could help participants increase their understanding of both process and substance issues. Such issues would include the engineering aspects of a project, ecological and economic analyses of proposed project alternatives, how communities and ecosystems work, and how status quo decision-making processes and project decisions can be challenged. Another relevant issue would likely be how members of the public can work together to define and pursue their own goals. This could involve analysis of basic interests of individuals and groups involved in the EA process. This might be assisted by education that clarifies the often complex, jargon-laden discourse encountered in EA. Such experiences could reveal the often-conflicting interests being served in the EA process. Moreover, the revelation of these interests could provide insight into underlying socioeconomic structures, which may or may not be compatible with the needs, values and ideals of the various participants. Identification and analysis of basic interests also enables EA participants to evaluate pro-development discourses and present credible and forceful counter discourses. Such counter discourses cover a range of disciplines and topics and could include portrayal of cooperation among resource communities and alternative models of economic development. Finally, it could include learning about how local initiatives can affect change in existing institutions and structures of power. The education and learning processes envisioned here are adaptive and non-linear,

involving numerous feedback loops. At a macro level, participation in the management process could reinforce critical consciousness, facilitate perspective transformation, and become an educational process in itself. After all, the educative function of participation is an integral part of participatory democracy theory. ‘Participation develops and fosters the very qualities necessary for it; the more individuals participate the better able they become to do so’ (Pateman, 1972, p. 43). For example, EA participants could learn by doing and gain experience in making presentations, filing appeals, lobbying and advocacy, and interacting with technical experts.

Reality check As they are in most areas of life, change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict are enduring themes in resource and environmental management (Mitchell, 1995; 1997). The ensuing discussion, therefore, relies on these themes to examine and assess the concept of critical EA education. The implications of change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict for critical EA education are considered, as are the implications of critical EA education for the four themes. This discussion provides a reality check, or test, for critical EA education and results in a more viable and robust concept. It also provides insight into basic principles and continues the process of attaching details to the conceptual framework.

Change ‘Major and continued change is the social fact of our time. To survive, . . . we must embrace the concept of change’ (Bauman and Werick, 1993, p. 3). In resource and environmental management, change occurs in and among natural and human systems and manifests itself in new situations, threats, opportunities and solutions (Mitchell, 1997). An objective of critical EA education is to enable members of the public to recognize and respond to the need for social reform. Thus, critical EA education could become a force for change in resource and environmental management. It could affect change

91

92

A. Diduck

at two levels, namely cognitive development and greater personal autonomy. The cognitive dimension has obvious personal implications but it also has interpersonal, or social, implications. Public knowledge or awareness is often a key element in social reform. For example, the Brundtland Commission recognized that, in addition to legal and institutional changes, changes in public attitudes and awareness are necessary to achieve the objective of integrating environmental and economic concerns in decision making (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The personal autonomy dimension has potentially far-reaching political implications. Personal autonomy empowers individuals to become agents for change. The direction of such change is difficult to predict and depends on local environmental and cultural conditions. However, a growing body of literature links local control of resource management systems with sustainable resource uses (e.g. Gibbs and Bromley, 1989; Regier et al., 1989; Nelson, 1995b). Of course, there is always the danger that local users will not worry about impacts on users outside their own ‘area’ and, thereby, create problems for sustainability elsewhere. This underscores the uncertainty associated with social and political change. A further implication of critical EA education is that it supports analysis of environmental change within a political ecology framework. Political ecology was developed to further understanding of the socio-political context of environmental change, particularly in developing nations (Bryant, 1992). It relies on analysis of competing interests to explain political sources, conditions and ramifications of environmental change. Critical EA education would rely on similar techniques, namely discourse and interest analysis, to deconstruct complex social problems to reveal competing interests in society. Further consideration of political ecology concepts may prove instructive for development of critical EA education at conceptual and normative levels.

Complexity Biophysical and social systems, and the interrelationships between the two are

fundamentally complex. Moreover, the turbulence, or change, frequently experienced in natural and human systems exacerbates complexity. Environmental change, for example, occurs in a context of multilayered and cyclical interactions among social, political and economic variables, occasionally involving violent conflict (Homer-Dixon, 1991). Complexity, for its part, can affect change, given the propensity of complex systems for spontaneous, disorderly and unpredictable change (Waldrop, 1992). The implications of critical EA education for complexity in resource and environmental management are several. As noted, by relying on the disclosure of basic interests of individuals and groups involved in the EA process, critical EA education could simplify discourse encountered in EA. Of course, if the underlying interests were more subtle and complex than the overt discourse, critical EA education would contribute to the complexity of the situation. A further implication relates to the potential emancipatory effects of critical EA education. Increased personal autonomy, fostered by critical EA education, offsets the sense of frustration and powerlessness which members of the public experience in the face of the complexity (and uncertainty) associated with most EA scenarios. An implication of complexity is that integrating notions of problem bounding could strengthen critical EA education. Bounding filters the vast array of variables and interrelationships found in EA and focuses on a selective range of key issues and participants. Similar reductive exercises are found in integrated resource management (Born and Sonzogni, 1995; Margerum and Born, 1995) and adaptive environmental management (Walters, 1986; Lee, 1993; Holling, 1995). A further implication is that it may be difficult or impossible to predict the effects of critical EA education, particularly over large temporal and spatial scales. As noted earlier, complex systems are subject to disorderly and unpredictable, or chaotic, change. Cartwright (1991) asserted that in situations reflecting chaos, planners and analysts may understand local conditions and interrelationships, but cannot predict outcomes or impacts at a global scale.

Learning for a sustainable future

Uncertainty The complexity and change encountered in resource and environmental management contribute to situations characterized by substantial uncertainty. Wynne (1992) described four categories of uncertainty: • risk—workings of the system are known and the probability of various outcomes can be derived; • uncertainty—probability of various outcomes cannot be determined, although key variables or parameters of the problem are apparent; • ignorance—impending circumstances escape recognition, i.e., the problem is not apparent; and • indeterminacy—cause and effect relationships are not apparent and understanding is not possible. Critical EA education has various implications for uncertainty in resource and environmental management. Increased awareness can illuminate unknown situations and help identify problems, thereby reducing ignorance. Discourse and interest analysis, inherent in critical EA education, can reveal ‘causal’ chains or intentions in human systems and, thereby, reduce indeterminacy. Interestingly, reducing uncertainty may reveal greater complexities in the systems being examined. As noted earlier, a potential effect of critical EA education is that individuals become empowered as agents for change. This has implications for uncertainty because, when people are agents of change, they may become more certain in their actions as they drive change toward a desired future. Uncertainty also has several implications for critical EA education. First, the conceptualization of critical EA education would be enhanced by integration of adaptive management concepts. An adaptive approach, emphasizing flexibility, continuous monitoring and the willingness to learn from mistakes, ‘is how to cope with the uncertain, the unexpected, and the unknown’ (Holling, 1978, p. 7). Monitoring at the operational level provides feedback for consideration at normative and strategic levels. A further implication relates to planning at the operational level. Although transactive planning, with its emphasis on community

participation, dialogue and mutual learning, is consistent with the underlying philosophy of critical EA education, EA educators should be prepared to adopt different planning models based on local needs, expectations and conditions. Dale and Lane’s (1994) strategic perspectives analysis, a flexible approach to participatory social impact assessment that recognizes various operational contexts, may be instructive in this regard. Yet another implication is that uncertainty confirms the value of a Freirean approach to education, with its emphasis on critical thinking, empowerment and problem solving. The critical approach is less reliant on the certainty and veracity of information than is the ‘banking’ method of instruction. Freire (1970, p. 58) described the banking method as ‘an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. . . . [T]he teacher issues communique´s and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize and repeat.’ Political questions aside, the merit of the banking method is debatable in a climate of uncertainty and turbulence, given that the value of the ‘deposit’ is subject to change as shifts occur in resource management theory and practice.

Conflict It is often suggested that resource and environmental managers do not manage natural systems, but manage human interactions with natural systems. Mitchell (1997) argued that if this proposition is true, much of resource and environmental management is management of conflict. Dorcey’s (1986) typology presented four basic forms of conflict: • cognitive—the parties have different understandings of a situation; • value—the parties cannot agree on the objective to achieve, but can agree on the consequences of alternative objectives; • interests—the parties cannot agree on the distribution of costs and benefits; and • behavioral—personal or historical differences color the relationship of the parties. Critical EA education has a number of implications for conflict. Increased knowledge

93

94

A. Diduck

can clarify terms and conceptual models, provide a common base of understanding and thereby resolve conflict at the cognitive level. Increased awareness can also clarify and make explicit the opposing values, interests or actions at the heart of a conflict. Such awareness may not resolve the conflict, but understanding is often the first step toward reconciliation. In addition, public participation in resource management functions can be viewed as a means of dispute resolution (Carpenter, 1995). It has been argued that the educative function of public participation enhances social rationality and increases social cohesion (Pateman, 1972; Gibson, 1975; Lafferty and Meadowcraft, 1996; Lummis, 1996). If this is true, critical EA education could facilitate conflict resolution by fostering public involvement. Conflict also has implications for critical EA education. As indicated by Mitchell (1997), conflict is a positive force when it identifies inadequate or misleading information. In such cases, EA educators can use conflict as a guide in making strategic and operational decisions. The pervasiveness of conflict also implies that EA educators should be versed in alternative dispute resolution techniques such as negotiation and mediation. Knowledge of basic legal processes and arbitration models would also be an asset.

Conclusion Changing from current patterns of resource use to a sustainable and equitable economy is a complex and intractable problem. This paper suggests that critical EA education, as a means to facilitate public involvement in resource management and thereby empower local communities to take greater control of resource use decisions, may form part of the solution. This model of non-formal, environmental education for adults challenges unsustainable resource exploitation and helps address criticisms of public involvement in management practices. Critical EA education, involving both cognitive development and personal empowerment, focuses on critical intelligence, problem solving and social action.

The concept of critical EA education is tested and enriched by analysis in the context of four enduring themes in resource and environmental management: change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Directions for further conceptual development are apparent, namely integration with adaptive management concepts, development of a problem bounding (or reductive) component, analysis within a political ecology framework, and synthesis with elements of planning theory. Positive implications of critical EA education for change, complexity, uncertainty and conflict are also apparent. Examples include: cognitive development and personal empowerment at the level of local resource communities; simplification of the often complex discourse encountered in resource management processes; reduction in feelings of powerlessness often experienced by members of the public in EA scenarios; a reduction of ignorance and indeterminacy regarding resource management issues; conflict resolution at the cognitive level; and, clarification of the opposing values, interests or actions at the heart of a conflict.

References Aronowitz, S. (1993). Paulo Freire’s radical democratic humanism. In Paulo Freire: A Critical Encounter (P. Mclaren and P. Leonard, eds), pp. 8–24. New York: Routledge. Bauman, D. D. and Werick, W. (1993). Water management: why the resistance to change? Water Resources Update 90 (Winter), 3–9. Berkes, F. (ed.) (1989). Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable Development. London: Belhaven. Born, S. M. and Sonzogni, W. C. (1995). Integrated environmental management: strengthening the conceptualization. Environmental Management 19, 167–181. Bryant, R. L. (1992). Political ecology: an emerging research agenda in Third World studies. Political Geography 11, 12–36. Carpenter, S. (1995). The blurring of roles between public participation and conflict resolution practitioners. Interact 1, 37–52. Cartwright, T. J. (1991). Planning and chaos theory. Journal of the American Planning Association 57, 44–56. Clark, M. C. (1993). Transformational learning. In New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (S. B. Merriam, ed.), pp. 47–56. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Learning for a sustainable future Clover, D. E. (1995). Theoretical foundations and practice of critical environmental adult education in Canada. Convergence 28, 44–53. Clover, D. E. (1996). Developing international environmental adult education: the challenge, theory and practice. In A Sourcebook for Environmental Education: A Practical Review based on the Belgrade Charter (W. Leal Filho, Z. Murphy and K. O’Loan, eds), pp. 92–111. London: Parthenon. Clover, D. E., Folley, S. and Hall, B. (1998). The Nature of Transformation: Environmental Adult and Popular Education. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Collard, S. and Law, M. (1989). The limits of perspective transformation: a critique of Mezirow’s theory. Adult Education Quarterly 39, 99–107. Costanza, R. (ed.) (1991). Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press. Courtney Hall, P. (1997). Environmental education in a democratic society. In Canadian Issues in Environmental Ethics (A. Wellington, A. Greenbaum and W. Cragg, eds), pp. 363–385. Toronto: Broadview Press. Dale, A. P. and Lane, M. B. (1994). Strategic perspectives analysis: a procedure for participatory and political social impact assessment. Society and Natural Resources 7, 253–267. Daly, H. E. and Cobb, J. (1989). For the Common Good. Boston: Beacon Press. Daniels, S. E. and Walker, G. B. (1996). Collaborative learning: improving public deliberation in ecosystem-based management. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 16, 71–102. Diduck, A. P. and Sinclair, A. J. (1997a). The concept of critical environmental assessment (EA) education. The Canadian Geographer 41, 294–307. Diduck, A. P. and Sinclair, A. J. (1997b). Testing the concept of critical environmental assessment (EA) education. In Canadian Environmental Assessment in Transition (A. J. Sinclair, ed.), pp. 77–124. Waterloo: University of Waterloo. Disinger, J. F. (1990). Environmental education for sustainable development? The Journal of Environmental Education 21, 3–6. Dorcey, A. H. J. (1986). Bargaining in the Governance of Pacific Coastal Resources: Research and Reform. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Westwater Research Centre. Dovers, S. R. (1993). Contradictions in sustainability. Environmental Conservation 20, 217–222. Fien, J. (1993). Education for the Environment: Critical Curriculum Theorising and Environmental Education. Geelong: Deakin University Press. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury. Freire, P. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Seabury. Freire, P. (1985). The Politics of Education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Friedmann, J. (1987). Planning in the Public Domain: From Knowledge to Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gibbs, C. J. N. and Bromley, D. W. (1989). Institutional arrangements for management of rural resources: common-property regimes. In Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable Development (F. B. Berkes, ed.), pp. 22–32. London: Belhaven. Gibson, A. (1994). Freirean versus enterprise education: the difference is in the business. Convergence 28, 46–56. Gibson, R. (1975). The value of participation. In Environmental Management and Public Participation (P. S. Elder, ed.), pp. 7–39. Toronto: Canadian Environmental Law Research Foundation. Gibson, R. (1986). Critical Theory and Education. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Gibson, R. (1988). Tinkering Is Not Enough: A Comment on the Federal Government’s Green Paper on Environmental Assessment, Reforming Federal Environmental Assessment: A Discussion Paper. Vancouver: Environmental Assessment Caucus. Gibson, R. (1993). Environmental assessment design: lessons from the Canadian experience. The Environmental Professional 15, 12–24. Glasbergen, P. (1996). Learning to manage the environment. In Democracy and the Environment (W. M. Lafferty and J. Meadowcraft, eds), pp. 175–193. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Goodland, R. and Daly, H. (1995). Environmental sustainability. In Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (F. Vanclay and D. A. Bronstein, eds), pp. 303–322. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Goodland, R., Ledec, G. and Webb, M. (1989). Meeting environmental concerns caused by common-property mismanagement in economic development projects. In Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable Development (F. Berkes, ed.), pp. 148–163. London: Belhaven. Gore, J. (1992). What we can do for you! What can ‘we’ do for ‘you’. In Feminisms and Critical Pedagogy (C. Luke and J. Gore, eds), pp. 54–74. New York: Routledge. Greenall Gough, A. and Robottom, I. (1993). Towards a socially critical environmental education: water quality studies in a coastal school. Journal of Curriculum Studies 25, 301–316. Greig, S., Pike, G. and Selbey, D. (1987). Earthrights: Education as if the Planet Really Mattered. London: The World Wildlife Fund and Kogan Page. Guevara, J. R. (1996). Learning through participatory action research for community ecotourism planning. Convergence 29, 24–39. Hall, B. (1993). Introduction. In Voice of Change: Participatory Research in the United States and Canada (P. Park, M. Brydon-Miller, B. Hall and T. Jackson, eds), pp. xiii–xxii. London: Bergin and Garvey.

95

96

A. Diduck Hardi, P., Barg, S., Hodge, T. and Pinter, L. (1997). Measuring Sustainable Development: Review of Current Practice. Ottawa: Industry Canada. Hart, M. (1990). Critical theory and beyond: further perspectives on emancipatory education. Adult Education Quarterly 40, 125–138. Heaney, T. W. (1995). Issues in Freirean pedagogy [World Wide Web]. National-Louis University, Department of Adult and Continuing Education, [cited November 17, 1997]. Available online at: http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/Resources/Documents/ FreireIssues.html Holling, C. S. (ed.) (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. Holling, C. S. (1995). What barriers? What bridges? In Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions (L. H. Gunderson, C. S. Holling and S. S. Light, eds), pp. 3–34. New York: Columbia University Press. Homer-Dixon, T. F. (1991). On the threshold: environmental changes as causes of acute conflict. International Security 16, 76–116. hooks, b. (1993). Bell hooks speaking about Paulo Freire—the man, his work. In Paulo Freire: A Critical Encounter (P. Mclaren and P. Leonard, eds), pp. 146–154. New York: Routledge. Ibikunle-Johnson, V. (1989). Managing the community’s environment: grassroots participation in environmental education. Convergence 22, 13–23. Kakonge, J. O. (1996). Problems with public participation in EIA process: examples from SubSaharan Africa. Impact Assessment 14 (September), 309–320. Lafferty, W. M. and Meadowcraft, J. (1996). Democracy and the environment: congruence and conflict—preliminary reflections. In Democracy and the Environment (W. M. Lafferty and J. Meadowcraft, eds), pp. 1–17. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review 56, 257–277. Lee, K. N. (1993). Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment. Washington, DC: Island Press. Leopold, A. (1966). A Sand County Almanac. New York: Ballantine. Lummis, C. D. (1996). Radical Democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Mackie, R. (1980). Literacy and Revolution: The Pedagogy of Paulo Freire. London: Pluto Press. Margerum, R. D. and Born, S. M. (1995). Integrated environmental management: moving from theory to practice. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 38, 371–391. Marshall, D. (1998). Watershed management in British Columbia: the Fraser Basin experience. Environments 25, 65–79. McMullin, S. L. and Nielson, L. A. (1991). Resolution of natural resource allocation conflicts through effective public participation. Policy Studies Journal 19, 553–559. Merriam, S. B. (1993). Adult learning: where have we come from? Where are we headed? In New

Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (S. B. Merriam, ed.), pp. 5–14. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Merriam, S. B. and Caffarella, R. S. (1991). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Merrifield, J. (1993). Putting scientists in their place: participatory research in environmental and occupational health. In Voice of Change: Participatory Research in the United States and Canada (P. Park, M. Brydon-Miller, B. Hall and T. Jackson, eds), pp. 65–84. London: Bergin and Garvey. Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education Quarterly 32, 3–24. Mezirow, J. (ed.) (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mezirow, J. (1994). Understanding transformation theory. Adult Education Quarterly 44, 222–232. Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly 46, 158– 173. Mill, J. S. (1861). Representative Government. 1910 edn. London: Everyman. Miller, P. A. (1997). Strengthening civil society: adult education’s international challenge in the 21st century. Convergence 30, 15–22. Mitchell, B. (ed.) (1995). Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing Conflict and Uncertainty. 2nd edn. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Mitchell, B. (1997). Resource and Environmental Management. London: Longman. Moote, M. A., McClaren, M. P. and Chickering, D. K. (1997). Theory in practice: applying participatory democracy to public land planning. Environmental Management 21, 877–889. Nelson, J. G. (1995a). Natural and cultural heritage planning, protection and interpretation: from ideology to practice, a civics approach. In Linking Cultural and Natural Heritage (J. Marsh and J. Fialkowski, eds), pp. 33–43. Peterborough, ON: The Frost Centre For Canadian Heritage Development Studies, Trent University. Nelson, J. G. (1995b). Sustainable development, conservation strategies, and heritage. In Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing Conflict and Uncertainty (B. Mitchell, ed.), pp. 384–405. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Nelson, J. G. and Serafin, R. (1996). Environmental and resource planning and decision making in Canada: a human ecological and a civics approach. In Canada in Transition: Results of Environmental and Human Geographical Research (R. Vogelsang, ed.), pp. 1–25. Bochum: Universitatsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. O’Neill, W. F. (1981). Educational Ideologies: Con-

Learning for a sustainable future temporary Expressions of Educational Philosophy. Santa Monica: Goodyear. Orr, D. W. (1994). Earth in Mind. Washington: Island Press. Owen, S. (1998). Land use planning in the Nineties: CORE lessons. Environments 25, 14–26. Palmer, J. (1998). Environmental Education in the 21st Century: Theory, Practice, Progress and Promise. London: Routledge, 284 p. Palsson, G. (1998). Learning by fishing: practical engagement and environmental concerns. In Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience (F. Berkes and C. Folke, eds), pp. 48–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pateman, C. (1972). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pearce, D. W. and Turner, R. K. (1990). Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pepper, D. (1987). The basis of a radical curriculum in environmental education. In Education, Ecology and Development: The Case for an Education Network (C. Lacy and R. Williams, eds), pp. 65–79. London: The World Wildlife Fund and Kogan Page. Pietrykowski, B. (1996). Knowledge and power in adult education: beyond Freire and Habermas. Adult Education Quarterly 46, 82–97. Regier, H. A., Mason, R. V. and Berkes, F. (1989). Reforming the use of natural resources. In Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable Development (F. B. Berkes, ed.), pp. 110–125. London: Belhaven. Regnier, R. and Penna, P. (1996). The limits of empowerment in anti-nuclear advocacy: a case study of adult education for technological literacy. The Canadian Journal of Adult Education 10, 35–57. Roberts, R. (1995). Public involvement: from consultation to participation. In Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (F. Vanclay and D. A. Bronstein, eds), pp. 221–246. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Robottom, I. (1987). Towards inquiry-based professional development in environmental education. In Environmental Education: Practice and Possibility (I. Robottom, ed.), pp. 83–119. Victoria: Deakin University. Rocha, E. M. (1997). A ladder of empowerment. The Journal of Planning Education and Research 17, 31–44.

Sachs, W. (ed.) (1993). Global Ecology: A New Arena for Political Conflict. London: Zed Books. Shor, I. (1993). Education is politics: Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy. In Paulo Freire: A Critical Encounter (P. McLaren and P. Leonard, eds), pp. 25–35. New York: Routledge. Sinclair, A. J. and Diduck, A. P. (1995). Public education: an undervalued component of the environmental assessment public involvement process. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15, 219–240. Sterling, S. and EDET Group. (1992). Good EarthKeeping: Education, Training and Awareness for the Sustainable Future. London: Environmental Development Education and Training Group, UNEP-UK. Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E. and Prabhu, M. (1996). Assessing the impact of environmental impact statements on citizens. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 16, 171–182. Tennant, M. (1994). Response to Understanding Transformation Theory. Adult Education Quarterly 44, 233–235. Viezzer, M. (1992). Learning For environmental action. Convergence 24, 3–8. Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. New York: Simon and Shuster. Walters, C. (1986). Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. New York: Macmillan. Webler, T., Kastenholz, H. and Renn, O. (1995). Public participation in impact assessment: a social learning perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15, 443–463. Welton, M. R. (1993). The contribution of critical theory to our understanding of adult learning. In New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (S. B. Merriam, ed.), pp. 81–90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Wood, C. W. (1995). Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review. London: Longman. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wynne, B. (1992). Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventative paradigm. Global Environmental Change 2, 111–127. Young, R. E. (1989). A Critical Theory of Education. Sydney: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

97