- Email: [email protected]
UNEP international environmental education program
Steps along the Path: the UNESCO/UNEP International Environmental Education Program ANNE M. BLACKBURN* 5 Brackett Road, Wayland, M A O1 778, U.S.A.
SUMMARY Issue 2(4) of The Environmentalist featured an editorial entitled, "The Importance of Being In Earnest About Environmental Education". The editorial discussed, in brief a September 1982 meeting at Unesco in Paris at which environmental education experts evaluated the Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Program and made recommendations for the program's upcoming triennial budget. This report, as indicated in the editorial, examines the International Environmental Education Program in more detail, exploring why it was established, its major goals, and the pilot projects and other activities whieh have taken place in the eight years that the Program has existed. The article concludes with a series of suggestions for supplementing the Unesco/UNEP effort as well as with a comprehensive list o f publications for readers who are interested in pursuing any of the individual aspects o f the International Environmental Education Program.
UNESCO, UNEP, Education *Anne M. Blackburn is currently an Expert Consultant to the Commanding Officer and Chief of Planning at the New England Division/US Army Corps of Engineers, Waltham, MA, USA. Her responsibilities include maintaining coordination with the Governors of the six New England States, through the NE Governors' Conference, and with officials in multiple state agencies and ten federal agencies which have water-related responsibilities. Formerly Ms. Blackburn worked at the New England River Basins Commission (Boston, MA) and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (Rockville, MD) where, in 1978, she and David Hughes-Evans, co-editor of The Environmentalist, jointly managed the Thames/Potomac Seminars. These brought US and UK policy experts and other water-related interests together to discuss management approaches to common problems. Ms. Blackburn has served as a consultant to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; and to the US Environmental Protection Agency; the National Science Foundation; and Resources For the Future on public involvement in resource management issues. She is a member of the International Editorial Board of The Environmentalist, and is married to James Aldrich, co-editor of the publication. 0251-1088/83/$3.00
Is it possible to approach an impossible task with limited funds and staff through an organization which must depend upon cooperation and not coercion? These questions may well have passed through the minds of those first responsible for the International Environmental Education Program (IEEP) at Unesco. But fortunately, the questions have not been permitted to prevail - - a n d much has been accomplished despite these precise circumstances. In the eight years that the IEEP has existed, 117 Member States (75% of the Unesco membership) have taken part in IEEP activities--including 30 countries in Africa; 15 in Asia and the Pacific; 15 Arab States; 26 countries in Latin America; and 31 in North America and Europe. Over 1000 key educational experts and policy officials have been brought together at major meetings sponsored by the IEEP. Twenty-four pilot projects have been undertaken since 1977. A computerized information system has been established which contains data on 900 institutions involved in environmental education, and on 300 individual projects. And, Connect, the Unesco newsletter established by the IEEP as an information link, is now circulated free of charge four times a year in five languages to 13 000 readers worldwide. More impressive than these sets of numbers, however, is that the activities have been carried out according to a coherent plan which has maximized the total effect of the pilot projects, conferences and research that have been undertaken thus far. The result has been that the 'impossible task' has been reduced in size faster than otherwise might have been true. The thrust behind the establishment of the IEEP was Recommendation 96 at the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Global Environment. Participants at that important gathering realized that many of their recommendations
The Environmentalist, 3 (1983) 269-276
©Elsevier Sequoia/Printed in The Netherlands
stood little chance of implementation without a greater understanding by the global public of the needs for changed behaviors. Recommendation 96 stipulated that "the Secretary General, the organizations of the United Nations system, especially Unesco, and the other international agencies concerned, should, after consultation and agreement, take the necessary steps to .establish an international programme in environmental education, interdisciplinary in approach, in-school and out-of-school, encompassing all levels of education and directed towards the general public, in particular, the ordinary citizen living in rural and urban areas, youth and adult alike, with a view to educating him as to the simple steps he might take, within his means, to manage and control his environment". It is interesting to note that even at that early stage much emphasis was placed upon raising the awareness of individuals to the needs for changed values and behavior. For beyond an individual's ability to improve his or her own immediate environment, multiple nation, broad-based public support has been critical in developing effective national environmental and environmental education programs, and in sustaining them through shifts in political leadership and economic conditions within individual countries. The IEEP was formally established, in 1975, in an agreement between Unesco and U N E P - the United Nations Environment Program, which had been set up as an implementing mechanism for many of the recommendations coming out of Stockholm. The program was placed in Unesco's Education Section, as a part of the Division of Science, Technical and Vocational Education. A small staff was assembled consisting of individuals familiar with the environmental problems and educational systems in each of the Unesco Regions. The staff began their work by concentrating on the following objectives: • facilitation, coordination, joint planning and preparation of projects and activities essential to the development of an international environmental education program; • promotion of the exchange of ideas and information; • conduct of research, especially into 'innovative methods' suitable to environmental education; and • design and evaluation of new methods, curriculum, materials and programs for in-school and out-of-school youth and adults.
Determining some sense of where the world was in terms of progress in environmental education, although a complex task, was recognized as important in determining the sorts of pilot projects which needed to be supported, and in the formulation of policies and strategies through which environmental education perspectives could be integrated into educational systems around the world. 270
Americans may well have viewed this goal of integrating environmental education into national education systems as totally unrealistic; but it was, in fact, one of the basic strengths of the IEEP initial strategy. Educational policy in the United States is an illogical jumble of overlapping national, state and local policies and preferences. While some 'top-down' mandates do exist, such as those requiring forms of Special Education or 'back-to-basics' programs, actual support for these mandates tends to vary according to the political party in power and the momentary mood of the country. Thus the actual impact of US national policies on what happens in individual classrooms over any period of time is quite unpredictable. But many nations within the Unesco family, have Ministries of Education which exert powerful influence over the total curriculum, over teacher training and re-training, and even over the education of professionals. The IEEP staff realized that if justifiable, workable policies and strategies for national environmental education programs could be prepared for use by Member States which followed this latter pattern of educational management, progress towards global environmental literacy could be greatly accelerated. Efforts to clarify needs and to explore policy alternatives began at once, running concurrently, with feedback from each process feeding into the other.
BELGRADE-TO-TBILISI Worldwide surveys to determine needs and priorities in environmental education were initiated immediately by the IEEP, and fourteen experts in environmental education were commissioned to prepare papers. The authors were each to write on trends in environmental education at a particular level of education--primary, secondary, university and advanced degrees; teacher training and re-training, life-long education, community education; education of out-of-school youth, and for decision-makers and the general public. In October of 1975, in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, the IEEP brought together the authors of the 'trends papers' with other educational experts from around the world. Participants at the Belgrade Workshop were to review the trends papers and the need surveys, and to develop draft recommendations for the next phases of the IEEP, and for the implementation of environmental education programs in countries throughout the world. But the Belgrade Workshop was to become notable for quite an unexpected reason. The Environmentalist
As the meeting drew to a close, and the delegates reviewed all that they had learned from each other about the environmental problems and associated educational needs in each of their countries, the 120 delegates drew up and unanimously adopted "The Belgrade Charter". The Charter was a strong document which espoused a 'new global ethic' and called for "changes which will be directed towards an equitable distribution of the world's resources and will more fairly satisfy the needs of all peoples." The document went even further, stating, "Substantial resources for reallocation to meet human needs can be gained through restructuring military budgets and reducing competition in manufacture of arms. Disarmament should be the ultimate goal." Thus, at Belgrade, environmental education experts who had for years stayed largely within the 'comfortable' and uncontroversial issues of nature and conservation education, first publicly agreed that if environmental education were to be meaningful and accountable in this modern, complex and interdependent world, it had to espouse what the United Nations has called 'a New International Economic Order' and help to create "peace through coexistence and cooperation among nations with different social systems". It was entirely fitting that The Belgrade Charter formed the substance of the first issue of Connect, the newsletter established by the IEEP in response to the strong recommendation from the Belgrade delegates to strengthen communication about environmental education, worldwide. The IEEP strategy next called for the recommendations developed at Belgrade to be evaluated in all sectors of the world through a series of regional and national meetings. Each such gathering was to invite environmental education experts and other relevant professionals to assess the Belgrade findings from the perspective of the particular needs and priorities of their portion of the globe; and to suggest adjustments to the recommendations where necessary. Regional seminars followed, supported by the IEEP, in the Congo, Thailand, Kuwait, Colombia, Finland and the United States. Each meeting prepared a report and submitted it to the IEEP in preparation for the final round of major conferences. Thus by 1977, when the recommended strategies for an 'international environmental education program' were presented for approval at the Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education (Tbilisi, USSR), they had been thoroughly evaluated. This was entirely approVol. 3, No. 4 (1983)
pilate, for this assemblage was far more than another gathering of professionals interested in environmental education. This was a Ministerial Level meeting--ranking in importance just under Unesco General Conferences. Three hundred and forty delegates and observers from governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations attended. Sixty-six nations sent formal delegations. All formal sessions were conducted in the five languages of Unesco (Arabic, English, French, Russian and Spanish). Each formal action of the meeting was the product of official votes of delegates from the Member States. It was understood that the stances taken would be reported back to Member State governments, to the General Conference of Unesco, and to the Governing Board of UNEP as guidelines for future action to implement environmental education programs. Following the trend that had begun at Belgrade two years earlier, the recommendations coming out of the Tbilisi meeting emphasized 'quality of life' as opposed to 'environmental quality' alone. Thus a more human-focused definition of environmental education was accepted as the foundation for the global efforts which were to come. The Tbilisi recommendations also represent one of the earliest formal recognitions of education as a critical aspect of solving problems in the developing world--problems associated with human settlements, health and nutrition, susceptibility to natural disasters, poor agricultural methods and the too rapid exploitation of basic natural resources. These concerns were accepted as just as much in need of environmental education support as the problems of environmental pollution and the deterioration of environmental quality more typically associated with the industrialized nations.
SENSITIVITY TO THE NEED FOR CONSTITUENCIES The Tbilisi Conference marked the culmination of the first phase of the Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Program, and set the stage for the intra- and international efforts which were to follow during the next three years. The process through which support had been generated for this second phase deserves some comment. For, when the IEEP was initiated, and faced the insurmountable number of educational needs that existed, it would have been all too easy to succumb to that urgency by throwing all of the available funds at those needs. But the IEEP leadership insisted on spending funds to 271
document needs, conduct preliminary research, and support the series of international regional and national meetings that took place from Belgrade-to-Tbilisi. Their approach stimulated a strong constituency for global environmental education among interested professionals all over the world, and provided the basis for justifying commitments on the part of Member States to respond to the identified n e e d s - - t h u s creating a climate for implementation.
RESEARCH AND PILOT PROJECT FOCUSES As has been indicated, all the time that the work on clarification of needs and formulation of national policies was taking place, preliminary research was also being done. During the second phase of the IEEP the research activities increased, and pilot projects were initiated which were consistent with the directives approved at Tbilisi. These included: • Integration of an environmental dimension into national educational policies and plans, including outreaches to the media; e Expansion of interinstitutional and interdisciplinary coordination; • Reorientation of curriculum and educational materials to incorporate or strengthen an environmental dimension in interdisciplinary, problem-solving approaches; • Incorporation of environmental education in pre- and in-service training of educational administrators and planners, as well as educators; • Development of multi-media projects for the education and information of the general public about environmental issues; • Expansion of research and experimentation into methods for teaching and evaluating the success of environmental education; and • Continuation of the promotion of international and regional cooperation among Member States and other international governmental and non-governmental organizations. These may sound like very broad and general goals. However, they in fact reflect what was beginning to be better understood about the business of environmental education--understanding that had come about through the needs identification surveys, the trends papers and the numerous analyses that these materials had undergone. Gone was any attempt to make environmental education a 'whole new discipline'. In its place was a strong recognition that environmental education needed to be taught as a 'dimension' within nearly every other subject--biology, geography, economics, health, political science 272
and law. Gone were any ideas about setting up separate institutional mechanisms for implementation of environmental education; and instead, the pressure was on increased 'interinstitutional' and 'interdisciplinary' cooperation. 'Problem-solving approaches' were coming to be seen as vital. What we were learning from problem situations all over the world was that people had to be trained to think for themselves. New methods needed to be invented through which we could carry out the daily business of human living without harming natural systems, and which would permit us to remedy problems caused by past practices without triggering whole new sets of problems. A need had also been recognized to provide methods for "evaluating the effectiveness of environmental education programs"--so that the programs would be able to survive the inevitable budgetary battles they were sure to face. And, finally, the importance of non-governmental organizations was becoming more and more evident--especially organizations active on the international scene. It was becoming increasingly clear that mechanisms were vitally needed which could help to educate people all over the world about the increasing numbers of environmental issues which crossed political borders, traversed rivers, oceans or airsheds, or which were associated with individual elements of multinational economic undertakings. Armed with all that they had learned during the past two years, the IEEP staff began to develop regionally adaptable prototype curriculum modules for teachers and students. The issues selected as initial topics included the: • use and management of material resources • pollution • desertification • health and nutrition • urban environmental problems. Related pilot projects were initiated on desertification, natural disasters, and marginal urban areas. These had, as a primary objective, the task of helping schools and communities develop the values, attitudes knowledge and skills necessary to participate effectively in environmental problem prevention and solution. Research was initiated to achieve the following: e analysis of Member State experiences with incorporating an environmental dimension into formal and non-formal education; • study of the effectiveness of the IEEP's own regionally adaptable prototype modules; • examination of the effectiveness of other approaches, such as gaming and simulation, in communicating information about Disaster The Environmentalist
Preparedness; H e a l t h and N u t r i t i o n and o t h e r such subjects. • evaluation o f ways to achieve rational use and p r o d u c t i o n o f e n e r g y (including alternative forms particularly a d a p t a b l e t o rural settlem e n t s ) ; and • d e v e l o p m e n t o f m e t h o d s for evaluating the effectiveness o f interdisciplinary and p r o b l e m solving a p p r o a c h e s in the teaching o f environmental education. By 1980 a series o f case studies had begun to e x a m i n e M e m b e r State experiences, following Tbilisi, w i t h accelerated e f f o r t s in t e a c h e r training and retraining. T e a c h e r Training W o r k s h o p s were also c o n d u c t e d for the U n e s c o Regions o f Asia and the Pacific ( c o n d u c t e d in Thailand); f o r E u r o p e ( c o n d u c t e d in the F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f G e r m a n y ) ; and f o r the Arab States (held in Bahrain). Subregional T e a c h e r Training Workshops were also s u p p o r t e d b y the IEEP in the Caribbean (held in Antigua); for E u r o p e (held in Czechoslovakia); and national T e a c h e r Training Workshops were c o n d u c t e d in Bangladesh, Argentina, Jamaica, Jugana, the Central African Republic, Sierra L e o n e , Poland, the USSR, L e b a n o n , etc. In all some 40 c o u n t r i e s had training w o r k s h o p s f o r k e y p e r s o n n e l w h i c h were s u p p o r t e d b y the IEEP. A d d i t i o n a l l y , an international o n e - m o n t h training course in EE was organized in Czechoslovakia in 1982. At the same t i m e t h a t these e f f o r t s were a t t e m p t i n g to s t r e n g t h e n the processes t h r o u g h which e n v i r o n m e n t a l e d u c a t i o n t o o k place, o t h e r pilot p r o j e c t s e x p l o r e d the e d u c a t i o n a l needs associated with p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l problems. F o r instance: • In Colombia, an IEEP sponsored project developed information on coffee ecosystems for rural populations. The materials were then extended to hi-national use in Bolivia. • In Peru, Primary Schools in Marginal Urban Settlements, were involved in the development of information on such subjects as: preventing the deterioration of air, water and soils;improving health and hygienic conditions; improving social and cultural relationships; childhood and nutrition; and on soil conservation. • In Mongolia, a general public education project used the mass media and an 'Eco museum' to provide information to 160 000 people on medicinal plants and uses; wildlife conservation; mineral resources and uses; and on environmental preservation and transportation. • In Ghana, Primary School teachers participated in a project to develop materials about environmental problems of SubSaharan Africa, including water utilization and food production. The Science Education Programme for Africa (SEPA) and Unesco's other networks subsequently distributed this information to other countries in the area. • In Egypt, Youth Associations and Clubs were the focus of programs on nationwide environmental problems. The goal was to involve the youth, country-wide, in programs of environmental education and conservation. • Costa Rica was the site of a project aimed at educating Primary School teachers and the general public on problems of tropical ralnforest ecosystems, especially those problems related to Vol. 3, No. 4 (1983)
energy production, nutrition and health practices. The developed materials were used for students, retraining of teachers, and with various socio-professionalgroups within the experimental area. • In Peru and Yugoslavia, students and teachers participated in the development of information about earthquakes. The information was subsequently distributed to the general public in those two nations. • In the Dominican Republic, the focus was on meteorological disasters, particularly the social and environmental problems associated with cyclones. These few examples illustrate t h a t the IEEP pilot p r o j e c t s covered a fairly wide range o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l subjects, b u t did n o t a t t e m p t to deal w i t h all needs in all p o r t i o n s o f the globe. Rather, the IEEP selected severe, c o m m o n problems f r o m which t h e r e could later be wide benefits f r o m materials dissemination, p r o v i d e d the p r o j e c t was successful. T h e projects c o n c e n t r a t e d o n p r o b l e m s m o s t o f t e n affecting p e o p l e in developing nations on the a s s u m p t i o n t h a t m u c h o f the action n e e d e d regarding p r o b l e m s in m o r e industrialized nations was being p r o v i d e d t h r o u g h o t h e r sources. T h e p r o j e c t s ' c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f simple materials a p p r o p r i a t e for use w i t h p r i m a r y school s t u d e n t s r e f l e c t e d the fact t h a t in developing nations o f t e n o n l y a v e r y small m i n o r i t y o f s t u d e n t s c o n t i n u e past the p r i m a r y level and the p e r c e n t a g e o f the adult p o p u l a t i o n t h a t has n e v e r a t t e n d e d school at all can o f t e n be high. Finally, the programs were generally a c t i o n - o r i e n t e d , and s o u g h t t o e m p o w e r individuals and c o m m u n i t i e s to take effective remedial a n d / o r preventative action at the local level. Thus progress was n o t m a d e d e p e n d e n t u p o n any sophisticated i m p l e m e n t a t i o n mechanism at the national g o v e r n m e n t a l level.
SUPPLEMENTING THIS POWERFUL TIVE F O R C E F O R C H A N G E
POSI-
At the same t i m e t h a t these activities have been taking place t h r o u g h the IEEP, o t h e r technological and sociological advances have b e e n occurring t h a t are opening p a t h w a y s t h r o u g h which e n v i r o n m e n t a l e d u c a t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n can be spread to wider and w i d e r circles o f the global population. • C o m m u n i c a t i o n satellite t e c h n o l o g y has advanced to the p o i n t w h e r e t h e r e can be groundt o - g r o u n d links b e t w e e n field technicians in r e m o t e locations and e x p e r t s in distant laboratories or research institutions. Nearly instant a n e o u s advice is n o w possible regarding questions o f h u m a n health, childcare, c r o p c o n d i t i o n , r e s o u r c e m a n a g e m e n t or disaster preparedness. T h e same t y p e o f c o m m u n i c a tions t e c h n o l o g y has also e x p a n d e d almost 273
magically the numbers of people who can be reached with educational messages. The communications satellite launched by India in 1975, for example (presently out of commission, unfortunately) enabled broadcasts to reach 2400 villages at one time. [Contact: Rashmi Mayur, Global Futures Network (Toronto/Bombay/New York) Suite 2000, 2 West 45th Street, New York City, NY 10036, USA.] • Networks are spontaneously springing up among community groups in developing nations. Often led by women, these informal educational mechanisms are teaching each other about health and nutrition, child care, and appropriate technology. [Contact: International Women's Tribune Center, 305 E. 46th Street, 6th Floor, New York City, NY 10017, USA.] • One particularly unique situation involving these networks is the International Community Leadership Project, which brought recognized community leaders (mostly women) from developing nations to teach women from underdeveloped sections of the United States and from migrant worker camps in this country how to become more effective in meeting their own needs at a community level. [Contact: Nathan Gray, Center for Education and Communication, 38 Babcock Street, Brookline, MA O2146, USA.] Recognition of the ability of people to act for themselves at a local level, given proper direction and technical assistance, is leading to some positive shifts in the way that international programs are being carried out. For instance, the massive interagency efforts to improve drinking water and sanitation systems in developing nations (being carried out under the sponsorship of the United Nation's International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade) are strongly emphasizing small, locally appropriate technology and systems which can be operated and maintained by the communities. [Contact: WHO, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland or UNDP, UN Plaza, New York City, NY 10017, USA.] And the Unesco Man and The Biosphere Program has come up with an educational tool that could usefully be replicated in many forms. MAB has developed a series of posters which explain major global ecosystems in wording that can be understood by persons without technical training. The series is available not only in several languages, but in a form which has only the posters. There are blank areas for the narrative, so that the language of a smaller country, or a dialect within a country can be added. [Contact: 274
Program of Man and The Biosphere/Unesco, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris, France.]
PARIS, SEPTEMBER 1982: ASSESSING PROGRESS/DEFINING NEXT STEPS In September 1982, the IEEP once again assembled a group of environmental education experts, this time to assess progress since Tbilisi, and to make recommendations for the next three years of the IEEP program. [See The Environmentalist, VoI. 2, No. 4, p. 279.] This time the group was relatively small--29 individuals from places with as diverse environmental needs as USSR, India, China, Lebanon, Thailand, Turkey, Poland, Sweden, Egypt, Brazil and USA. The delegates came from highly industrialized countries whose greatest environmental concerns were acid rain and disposal of exotic hazardous wastes to countries which faced 95% illiteracy and severe fundamental problems with water pollution, desertification and deforestation. Most of the countries are troubled by some combination of both of these types of environmental problems. Nonetheless, as discussions got underway, there was strong agreement among most of the participants that considerable progress had been made by the IEEP program. Specific areas of progress cited included: • the building of a basis for national environmental education policies and strategies; • improved communication and coordination among environmental education interests; • improved quantity and quality of relevant research; • successful development of innovative materials for in-school and out-of-school and adult education programs, and • particularly high benefits where pilot projects had been carried out.
Yet despite this list of accomplishments, there was, if anything an increased sense of urgency regarding continuation of the IEEP program. Two almost contradictory factors seemed to be behind this sense of urgency. One was the increased understanding (and accompanying alarm) of the interactions among environmental problems and their potential multiple negative effects on human as well as natural systems. But the second seemed to have grown out of the successes which had o c c u r r e d - - i t was almost as if in finding out that some of the worst types of environmental problems could be slowed or reversed, gave everyone increased hope and determination that more such problems be solved through improved education. The quality of the advice that was to come from this group was also impressive in its practicality. There was full realization that the present The Environmentalist
economic situation meant limited dollar availability for such work. Thus the focus was on maximizing the use of what had been learned or developed to date, and using existing institutions/ mechanisms as arms for implementation. Specifically, the recommendations developed in Paris suggested:
5. Making particular efforts to work constructively with members of the media in improving the frequency and quality of coverage of the educational aspects of environmental problem solving.
l. That the IEEP concentrate on disseminating high quality, easily replicated, low cost educational materials as opposed to emphasizing the development of additional materials. It was specifically suggested that the IEEP make the best prototypes available, especially to developing nations, with the nations paying for replication and taking responsibility for in-country distribution. 2. That the IEEP accelerate communication among interested parties by continuing Connect as a condensed source of information, and using appropriate other publications to carry more detailed accounts of projects which are relevant to their particular audiences. 3. That the IEEP support the use of existing regional, national and subnational organizations as the long-term implementing mechanisms for the international environmental education program. 4. That the IEEP work towards even greater cooperation among other agencies within the Unesco family, and with relevant non-governmental and professional organizations--especially those which operate on an international basis. 5. That the IEEP take particular pains to work more closely with governmental and non-governmental groups whose focus is nutrition and/or literacy.
The Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Program has contributed substantially to the goal of achieving international environmental education. And when viewed against that background of the other types of technological and sociological advances that are occurring this particular global educational goal appears to be one that can be reached. There is no doubt that progress will be closely linked to successful literacy campaigns. Indeed, collaborative efforts which use environmental education subject matter in such campaigns will help to meet two vitally important global educational goals at the same time. The assessments of needs, the development of prototypical educational materials and national strategies, plus the training sessions, workshops and conferences have all been useful. But possibly the most valuable service that the IEEP has performed is the people and organizational networks that it has stimulated and supported. Through these activities the IEEP has demonstrated that opportunities to collaborate on meeting educational and environmental needs encourages people to go beyond the political barriers and divisive issues which pull us apart, towards solutions which are positive, satisfying and mutually beneficial to all as residents on this interdependent and interrelated planet. The IEEP has helped to move us towards a goal that has perhaps been best stated by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who commented, "The salvation of mankind lies only in making everything the concern of all".
But those of us who are interested in and concerned about improving global environmental education must also look at what we can do to assist the IEEP in its future efforts. These possibilities include: 1. Making sure that our own representatives to Unesco are aware of the value of this program's efforts, and are encouraged to press for its continuation. 2. Encouraging publications and newsletters .of our own professional organizations to carry relevant coverage of IEEP acitivities; and stimulating the editors to inform the IEEP about relevant films, activities, projects, conferences, etc., that appropriate sub-interest groups are undertaking. 3. Contributing to maximizing the cross-fertilization that can take place between relevant professional groups and specialists in environmental education within our own countries or professional networks. For instance, it has been suggested by James Aldrich, co-editor of The Environmentalist, that national committees of Unesco's Man and the Biosphere (MAB) program invite environmental education specialists to join their membership. Such a move would provide the educators with unusually fine access to the latest in environmental problem and management thinking, and could also help to make the scientists who are involved more sensitive to the educational needs associated with their work. 4. Encouraging professional societies, nongovernmental and membership organizations--especially those active on the international s c e n e - - t o assist in meeting the environmental education needs which exist. The IEEP cannot be expected to do it all. Professional societies can contribute to upgrading environmental understandings of their own members, and can reach out to share information with relevant government leaders. It would be particularly helpful if international organizations like the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) would select certain areas of environmental education and concentrate on them. With that organization's access to top level policy-makers in government and industry, these may well be the most appropriate target audiences for their efforts. At any rate, some clear indication of the types of activities that IUCN and other such groups will take on as their responsibility would help the IEEP make best use of the funds and opportunities available to it. Vol. 3, No. 4 ( 1 9 8 3 )
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY Publications concerning the Unesco International Environmental Education Program, Available through Unesco except as noted. Questionnaire for Assessment of Resources for Environmental Education Needs and Priorities for Member States, Paris, Unesco, 1975. International Workshop on Environmental Education, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 1975 Final Report. Educational Documentation and Information, World Trends in Environmental Education, Bulletin of the International Bureau of Education, Uneseo/IBE, Paris, Geneva, 1976. Trends in Environmental Education, Unesco, 1977. Reports of Regional Meetings of Experts on Environmental Education in each of the following Unesco Regions: Latin America and The Caribbean; Asia; Africa; and the Arab States. All Final Reports completed in 1976. 275
Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Programme, Environmental Education Needs and Priorities: Preliminary Studies of the following Unesco Regions: Africa; Asia; and Latin America and the Caribbean, all published in 1976; and Europe, 1977. Report on the North American Regional Seminar on Environmental Education, The Alliance For Environmental Education, published by ERIC/Smeac, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA, 1976. ENVED-4, Education and the Challenge of Environmental Problems, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-5, The Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Programme, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-6, Needs and Priorities in Environmental Education: an International Survey, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-7, Regional Meetings of Experts on Environmental Education: A Synthetic Report, Paris, Unesco, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-8, Major Environmental Problems in Contemporary Society, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. Unesco, Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, Tbilisi, USSR, 1977, Final Report. Toward an Action Plan: A Report on the Tbilisi Conference on Environmental Education, Federal Interagency Committee on Education, US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1978. [For sale through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. Stock Number 017-080-01838-1.1 International Directory of Individuals Involved in Environmental Education, Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Programme, 1977.
276
International Directory of Institutions Active in the Field of Environmental Education, Preliminary Edition, Unesco, UNEP, IPEE, 1977. Reports on Regional and Subregional Training Workshops on Environmental Education in the Following Unesco Regions and Subregions: Africa, 1978; Latin America, 1979; Asia and the Pacific, and the Caribbean, 1980. Man and His Environment: an Overview of Unesco's Involvement, Paris, 1979 (Science Sector). Strategies for Developing an Environmental Education Curriculum: a Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Strategies for the Training of Teachers in Environmental Education: a Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Unesco/UNEP International Programme on Environmental Education and the Training of Engineers, Caracas, 1978. Suggestions for Developing a National Strategy for Environmental Education: a Planning and Management Process, Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Experimental Module for In-Service Training of Science Teachers and Supervisors in Environmental Education for Secondary Schools, in press/September 1982. Directory of Institutions Active in the Field of Environmental Education, Unesco, Paris, 1981. Connect, a quarterly Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter. Note: Persons interested in these publications can write to the Publications Office, Unesco, 7 Place de Fontenoy, Paris, 75700, France. Those interested in any of the pilot projects must request information through their National Commission to Unesco. The IEEP can not communicate directly about these projects except with those serving as Project Managers.
The Environmentalist
SUMMARY Issue 2(4) of The Environmentalist featured an editorial entitled, "The Importance of Being In Earnest About Environmental Education". The editorial discussed, in brief a September 1982 meeting at Unesco in Paris at which environmental education experts evaluated the Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Program and made recommendations for the program's upcoming triennial budget. This report, as indicated in the editorial, examines the International Environmental Education Program in more detail, exploring why it was established, its major goals, and the pilot projects and other activities whieh have taken place in the eight years that the Program has existed. The article concludes with a series of suggestions for supplementing the Unesco/UNEP effort as well as with a comprehensive list o f publications for readers who are interested in pursuing any of the individual aspects o f the International Environmental Education Program.
UNESCO, UNEP, Education *Anne M. Blackburn is currently an Expert Consultant to the Commanding Officer and Chief of Planning at the New England Division/US Army Corps of Engineers, Waltham, MA, USA. Her responsibilities include maintaining coordination with the Governors of the six New England States, through the NE Governors' Conference, and with officials in multiple state agencies and ten federal agencies which have water-related responsibilities. Formerly Ms. Blackburn worked at the New England River Basins Commission (Boston, MA) and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (Rockville, MD) where, in 1978, she and David Hughes-Evans, co-editor of The Environmentalist, jointly managed the Thames/Potomac Seminars. These brought US and UK policy experts and other water-related interests together to discuss management approaches to common problems. Ms. Blackburn has served as a consultant to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; and to the US Environmental Protection Agency; the National Science Foundation; and Resources For the Future on public involvement in resource management issues. She is a member of the International Editorial Board of The Environmentalist, and is married to James Aldrich, co-editor of the publication. 0251-1088/83/$3.00
Is it possible to approach an impossible task with limited funds and staff through an organization which must depend upon cooperation and not coercion? These questions may well have passed through the minds of those first responsible for the International Environmental Education Program (IEEP) at Unesco. But fortunately, the questions have not been permitted to prevail - - a n d much has been accomplished despite these precise circumstances. In the eight years that the IEEP has existed, 117 Member States (75% of the Unesco membership) have taken part in IEEP activities--including 30 countries in Africa; 15 in Asia and the Pacific; 15 Arab States; 26 countries in Latin America; and 31 in North America and Europe. Over 1000 key educational experts and policy officials have been brought together at major meetings sponsored by the IEEP. Twenty-four pilot projects have been undertaken since 1977. A computerized information system has been established which contains data on 900 institutions involved in environmental education, and on 300 individual projects. And, Connect, the Unesco newsletter established by the IEEP as an information link, is now circulated free of charge four times a year in five languages to 13 000 readers worldwide. More impressive than these sets of numbers, however, is that the activities have been carried out according to a coherent plan which has maximized the total effect of the pilot projects, conferences and research that have been undertaken thus far. The result has been that the 'impossible task' has been reduced in size faster than otherwise might have been true. The thrust behind the establishment of the IEEP was Recommendation 96 at the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Global Environment. Participants at that important gathering realized that many of their recommendations
The Environmentalist, 3 (1983) 269-276
©Elsevier Sequoia/Printed in The Netherlands
stood little chance of implementation without a greater understanding by the global public of the needs for changed behaviors. Recommendation 96 stipulated that "the Secretary General, the organizations of the United Nations system, especially Unesco, and the other international agencies concerned, should, after consultation and agreement, take the necessary steps to .establish an international programme in environmental education, interdisciplinary in approach, in-school and out-of-school, encompassing all levels of education and directed towards the general public, in particular, the ordinary citizen living in rural and urban areas, youth and adult alike, with a view to educating him as to the simple steps he might take, within his means, to manage and control his environment". It is interesting to note that even at that early stage much emphasis was placed upon raising the awareness of individuals to the needs for changed values and behavior. For beyond an individual's ability to improve his or her own immediate environment, multiple nation, broad-based public support has been critical in developing effective national environmental and environmental education programs, and in sustaining them through shifts in political leadership and economic conditions within individual countries. The IEEP was formally established, in 1975, in an agreement between Unesco and U N E P - the United Nations Environment Program, which had been set up as an implementing mechanism for many of the recommendations coming out of Stockholm. The program was placed in Unesco's Education Section, as a part of the Division of Science, Technical and Vocational Education. A small staff was assembled consisting of individuals familiar with the environmental problems and educational systems in each of the Unesco Regions. The staff began their work by concentrating on the following objectives: • facilitation, coordination, joint planning and preparation of projects and activities essential to the development of an international environmental education program; • promotion of the exchange of ideas and information; • conduct of research, especially into 'innovative methods' suitable to environmental education; and • design and evaluation of new methods, curriculum, materials and programs for in-school and out-of-school youth and adults.
Determining some sense of where the world was in terms of progress in environmental education, although a complex task, was recognized as important in determining the sorts of pilot projects which needed to be supported, and in the formulation of policies and strategies through which environmental education perspectives could be integrated into educational systems around the world. 270
Americans may well have viewed this goal of integrating environmental education into national education systems as totally unrealistic; but it was, in fact, one of the basic strengths of the IEEP initial strategy. Educational policy in the United States is an illogical jumble of overlapping national, state and local policies and preferences. While some 'top-down' mandates do exist, such as those requiring forms of Special Education or 'back-to-basics' programs, actual support for these mandates tends to vary according to the political party in power and the momentary mood of the country. Thus the actual impact of US national policies on what happens in individual classrooms over any period of time is quite unpredictable. But many nations within the Unesco family, have Ministries of Education which exert powerful influence over the total curriculum, over teacher training and re-training, and even over the education of professionals. The IEEP staff realized that if justifiable, workable policies and strategies for national environmental education programs could be prepared for use by Member States which followed this latter pattern of educational management, progress towards global environmental literacy could be greatly accelerated. Efforts to clarify needs and to explore policy alternatives began at once, running concurrently, with feedback from each process feeding into the other.
BELGRADE-TO-TBILISI Worldwide surveys to determine needs and priorities in environmental education were initiated immediately by the IEEP, and fourteen experts in environmental education were commissioned to prepare papers. The authors were each to write on trends in environmental education at a particular level of education--primary, secondary, university and advanced degrees; teacher training and re-training, life-long education, community education; education of out-of-school youth, and for decision-makers and the general public. In October of 1975, in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, the IEEP brought together the authors of the 'trends papers' with other educational experts from around the world. Participants at the Belgrade Workshop were to review the trends papers and the need surveys, and to develop draft recommendations for the next phases of the IEEP, and for the implementation of environmental education programs in countries throughout the world. But the Belgrade Workshop was to become notable for quite an unexpected reason. The Environmentalist
As the meeting drew to a close, and the delegates reviewed all that they had learned from each other about the environmental problems and associated educational needs in each of their countries, the 120 delegates drew up and unanimously adopted "The Belgrade Charter". The Charter was a strong document which espoused a 'new global ethic' and called for "changes which will be directed towards an equitable distribution of the world's resources and will more fairly satisfy the needs of all peoples." The document went even further, stating, "Substantial resources for reallocation to meet human needs can be gained through restructuring military budgets and reducing competition in manufacture of arms. Disarmament should be the ultimate goal." Thus, at Belgrade, environmental education experts who had for years stayed largely within the 'comfortable' and uncontroversial issues of nature and conservation education, first publicly agreed that if environmental education were to be meaningful and accountable in this modern, complex and interdependent world, it had to espouse what the United Nations has called 'a New International Economic Order' and help to create "peace through coexistence and cooperation among nations with different social systems". It was entirely fitting that The Belgrade Charter formed the substance of the first issue of Connect, the newsletter established by the IEEP in response to the strong recommendation from the Belgrade delegates to strengthen communication about environmental education, worldwide. The IEEP strategy next called for the recommendations developed at Belgrade to be evaluated in all sectors of the world through a series of regional and national meetings. Each such gathering was to invite environmental education experts and other relevant professionals to assess the Belgrade findings from the perspective of the particular needs and priorities of their portion of the globe; and to suggest adjustments to the recommendations where necessary. Regional seminars followed, supported by the IEEP, in the Congo, Thailand, Kuwait, Colombia, Finland and the United States. Each meeting prepared a report and submitted it to the IEEP in preparation for the final round of major conferences. Thus by 1977, when the recommended strategies for an 'international environmental education program' were presented for approval at the Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education (Tbilisi, USSR), they had been thoroughly evaluated. This was entirely approVol. 3, No. 4 (1983)
pilate, for this assemblage was far more than another gathering of professionals interested in environmental education. This was a Ministerial Level meeting--ranking in importance just under Unesco General Conferences. Three hundred and forty delegates and observers from governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations attended. Sixty-six nations sent formal delegations. All formal sessions were conducted in the five languages of Unesco (Arabic, English, French, Russian and Spanish). Each formal action of the meeting was the product of official votes of delegates from the Member States. It was understood that the stances taken would be reported back to Member State governments, to the General Conference of Unesco, and to the Governing Board of UNEP as guidelines for future action to implement environmental education programs. Following the trend that had begun at Belgrade two years earlier, the recommendations coming out of the Tbilisi meeting emphasized 'quality of life' as opposed to 'environmental quality' alone. Thus a more human-focused definition of environmental education was accepted as the foundation for the global efforts which were to come. The Tbilisi recommendations also represent one of the earliest formal recognitions of education as a critical aspect of solving problems in the developing world--problems associated with human settlements, health and nutrition, susceptibility to natural disasters, poor agricultural methods and the too rapid exploitation of basic natural resources. These concerns were accepted as just as much in need of environmental education support as the problems of environmental pollution and the deterioration of environmental quality more typically associated with the industrialized nations.
SENSITIVITY TO THE NEED FOR CONSTITUENCIES The Tbilisi Conference marked the culmination of the first phase of the Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Program, and set the stage for the intra- and international efforts which were to follow during the next three years. The process through which support had been generated for this second phase deserves some comment. For, when the IEEP was initiated, and faced the insurmountable number of educational needs that existed, it would have been all too easy to succumb to that urgency by throwing all of the available funds at those needs. But the IEEP leadership insisted on spending funds to 271
document needs, conduct preliminary research, and support the series of international regional and national meetings that took place from Belgrade-to-Tbilisi. Their approach stimulated a strong constituency for global environmental education among interested professionals all over the world, and provided the basis for justifying commitments on the part of Member States to respond to the identified n e e d s - - t h u s creating a climate for implementation.
RESEARCH AND PILOT PROJECT FOCUSES As has been indicated, all the time that the work on clarification of needs and formulation of national policies was taking place, preliminary research was also being done. During the second phase of the IEEP the research activities increased, and pilot projects were initiated which were consistent with the directives approved at Tbilisi. These included: • Integration of an environmental dimension into national educational policies and plans, including outreaches to the media; e Expansion of interinstitutional and interdisciplinary coordination; • Reorientation of curriculum and educational materials to incorporate or strengthen an environmental dimension in interdisciplinary, problem-solving approaches; • Incorporation of environmental education in pre- and in-service training of educational administrators and planners, as well as educators; • Development of multi-media projects for the education and information of the general public about environmental issues; • Expansion of research and experimentation into methods for teaching and evaluating the success of environmental education; and • Continuation of the promotion of international and regional cooperation among Member States and other international governmental and non-governmental organizations. These may sound like very broad and general goals. However, they in fact reflect what was beginning to be better understood about the business of environmental education--understanding that had come about through the needs identification surveys, the trends papers and the numerous analyses that these materials had undergone. Gone was any attempt to make environmental education a 'whole new discipline'. In its place was a strong recognition that environmental education needed to be taught as a 'dimension' within nearly every other subject--biology, geography, economics, health, political science 272
and law. Gone were any ideas about setting up separate institutional mechanisms for implementation of environmental education; and instead, the pressure was on increased 'interinstitutional' and 'interdisciplinary' cooperation. 'Problem-solving approaches' were coming to be seen as vital. What we were learning from problem situations all over the world was that people had to be trained to think for themselves. New methods needed to be invented through which we could carry out the daily business of human living without harming natural systems, and which would permit us to remedy problems caused by past practices without triggering whole new sets of problems. A need had also been recognized to provide methods for "evaluating the effectiveness of environmental education programs"--so that the programs would be able to survive the inevitable budgetary battles they were sure to face. And, finally, the importance of non-governmental organizations was becoming more and more evident--especially organizations active on the international scene. It was becoming increasingly clear that mechanisms were vitally needed which could help to educate people all over the world about the increasing numbers of environmental issues which crossed political borders, traversed rivers, oceans or airsheds, or which were associated with individual elements of multinational economic undertakings. Armed with all that they had learned during the past two years, the IEEP staff began to develop regionally adaptable prototype curriculum modules for teachers and students. The issues selected as initial topics included the: • use and management of material resources • pollution • desertification • health and nutrition • urban environmental problems. Related pilot projects were initiated on desertification, natural disasters, and marginal urban areas. These had, as a primary objective, the task of helping schools and communities develop the values, attitudes knowledge and skills necessary to participate effectively in environmental problem prevention and solution. Research was initiated to achieve the following: e analysis of Member State experiences with incorporating an environmental dimension into formal and non-formal education; • study of the effectiveness of the IEEP's own regionally adaptable prototype modules; • examination of the effectiveness of other approaches, such as gaming and simulation, in communicating information about Disaster The Environmentalist
Preparedness; H e a l t h and N u t r i t i o n and o t h e r such subjects. • evaluation o f ways to achieve rational use and p r o d u c t i o n o f e n e r g y (including alternative forms particularly a d a p t a b l e t o rural settlem e n t s ) ; and • d e v e l o p m e n t o f m e t h o d s for evaluating the effectiveness o f interdisciplinary and p r o b l e m solving a p p r o a c h e s in the teaching o f environmental education. By 1980 a series o f case studies had begun to e x a m i n e M e m b e r State experiences, following Tbilisi, w i t h accelerated e f f o r t s in t e a c h e r training and retraining. T e a c h e r Training W o r k s h o p s were also c o n d u c t e d for the U n e s c o Regions o f Asia and the Pacific ( c o n d u c t e d in Thailand); f o r E u r o p e ( c o n d u c t e d in the F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f G e r m a n y ) ; and f o r the Arab States (held in Bahrain). Subregional T e a c h e r Training Workshops were also s u p p o r t e d b y the IEEP in the Caribbean (held in Antigua); for E u r o p e (held in Czechoslovakia); and national T e a c h e r Training Workshops were c o n d u c t e d in Bangladesh, Argentina, Jamaica, Jugana, the Central African Republic, Sierra L e o n e , Poland, the USSR, L e b a n o n , etc. In all some 40 c o u n t r i e s had training w o r k s h o p s f o r k e y p e r s o n n e l w h i c h were s u p p o r t e d b y the IEEP. A d d i t i o n a l l y , an international o n e - m o n t h training course in EE was organized in Czechoslovakia in 1982. At the same t i m e t h a t these e f f o r t s were a t t e m p t i n g to s t r e n g t h e n the processes t h r o u g h which e n v i r o n m e n t a l e d u c a t i o n t o o k place, o t h e r pilot p r o j e c t s e x p l o r e d the e d u c a t i o n a l needs associated with p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l problems. F o r instance: • In Colombia, an IEEP sponsored project developed information on coffee ecosystems for rural populations. The materials were then extended to hi-national use in Bolivia. • In Peru, Primary Schools in Marginal Urban Settlements, were involved in the development of information on such subjects as: preventing the deterioration of air, water and soils;improving health and hygienic conditions; improving social and cultural relationships; childhood and nutrition; and on soil conservation. • In Mongolia, a general public education project used the mass media and an 'Eco museum' to provide information to 160 000 people on medicinal plants and uses; wildlife conservation; mineral resources and uses; and on environmental preservation and transportation. • In Ghana, Primary School teachers participated in a project to develop materials about environmental problems of SubSaharan Africa, including water utilization and food production. The Science Education Programme for Africa (SEPA) and Unesco's other networks subsequently distributed this information to other countries in the area. • In Egypt, Youth Associations and Clubs were the focus of programs on nationwide environmental problems. The goal was to involve the youth, country-wide, in programs of environmental education and conservation. • Costa Rica was the site of a project aimed at educating Primary School teachers and the general public on problems of tropical ralnforest ecosystems, especially those problems related to Vol. 3, No. 4 (1983)
energy production, nutrition and health practices. The developed materials were used for students, retraining of teachers, and with various socio-professionalgroups within the experimental area. • In Peru and Yugoslavia, students and teachers participated in the development of information about earthquakes. The information was subsequently distributed to the general public in those two nations. • In the Dominican Republic, the focus was on meteorological disasters, particularly the social and environmental problems associated with cyclones. These few examples illustrate t h a t the IEEP pilot p r o j e c t s covered a fairly wide range o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l subjects, b u t did n o t a t t e m p t to deal w i t h all needs in all p o r t i o n s o f the globe. Rather, the IEEP selected severe, c o m m o n problems f r o m which t h e r e could later be wide benefits f r o m materials dissemination, p r o v i d e d the p r o j e c t was successful. T h e projects c o n c e n t r a t e d o n p r o b l e m s m o s t o f t e n affecting p e o p l e in developing nations on the a s s u m p t i o n t h a t m u c h o f the action n e e d e d regarding p r o b l e m s in m o r e industrialized nations was being p r o v i d e d t h r o u g h o t h e r sources. T h e p r o j e c t s ' c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f simple materials a p p r o p r i a t e for use w i t h p r i m a r y school s t u d e n t s r e f l e c t e d the fact t h a t in developing nations o f t e n o n l y a v e r y small m i n o r i t y o f s t u d e n t s c o n t i n u e past the p r i m a r y level and the p e r c e n t a g e o f the adult p o p u l a t i o n t h a t has n e v e r a t t e n d e d school at all can o f t e n be high. Finally, the programs were generally a c t i o n - o r i e n t e d , and s o u g h t t o e m p o w e r individuals and c o m m u n i t i e s to take effective remedial a n d / o r preventative action at the local level. Thus progress was n o t m a d e d e p e n d e n t u p o n any sophisticated i m p l e m e n t a t i o n mechanism at the national g o v e r n m e n t a l level.
SUPPLEMENTING THIS POWERFUL TIVE F O R C E F O R C H A N G E
POSI-
At the same t i m e t h a t these activities have been taking place t h r o u g h the IEEP, o t h e r technological and sociological advances have b e e n occurring t h a t are opening p a t h w a y s t h r o u g h which e n v i r o n m e n t a l e d u c a t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n can be spread to wider and w i d e r circles o f the global population. • C o m m u n i c a t i o n satellite t e c h n o l o g y has advanced to the p o i n t w h e r e t h e r e can be groundt o - g r o u n d links b e t w e e n field technicians in r e m o t e locations and e x p e r t s in distant laboratories or research institutions. Nearly instant a n e o u s advice is n o w possible regarding questions o f h u m a n health, childcare, c r o p c o n d i t i o n , r e s o u r c e m a n a g e m e n t or disaster preparedness. T h e same t y p e o f c o m m u n i c a tions t e c h n o l o g y has also e x p a n d e d almost 273
magically the numbers of people who can be reached with educational messages. The communications satellite launched by India in 1975, for example (presently out of commission, unfortunately) enabled broadcasts to reach 2400 villages at one time. [Contact: Rashmi Mayur, Global Futures Network (Toronto/Bombay/New York) Suite 2000, 2 West 45th Street, New York City, NY 10036, USA.] • Networks are spontaneously springing up among community groups in developing nations. Often led by women, these informal educational mechanisms are teaching each other about health and nutrition, child care, and appropriate technology. [Contact: International Women's Tribune Center, 305 E. 46th Street, 6th Floor, New York City, NY 10017, USA.] • One particularly unique situation involving these networks is the International Community Leadership Project, which brought recognized community leaders (mostly women) from developing nations to teach women from underdeveloped sections of the United States and from migrant worker camps in this country how to become more effective in meeting their own needs at a community level. [Contact: Nathan Gray, Center for Education and Communication, 38 Babcock Street, Brookline, MA O2146, USA.] Recognition of the ability of people to act for themselves at a local level, given proper direction and technical assistance, is leading to some positive shifts in the way that international programs are being carried out. For instance, the massive interagency efforts to improve drinking water and sanitation systems in developing nations (being carried out under the sponsorship of the United Nation's International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade) are strongly emphasizing small, locally appropriate technology and systems which can be operated and maintained by the communities. [Contact: WHO, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland or UNDP, UN Plaza, New York City, NY 10017, USA.] And the Unesco Man and The Biosphere Program has come up with an educational tool that could usefully be replicated in many forms. MAB has developed a series of posters which explain major global ecosystems in wording that can be understood by persons without technical training. The series is available not only in several languages, but in a form which has only the posters. There are blank areas for the narrative, so that the language of a smaller country, or a dialect within a country can be added. [Contact: 274
Program of Man and The Biosphere/Unesco, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris, France.]
PARIS, SEPTEMBER 1982: ASSESSING PROGRESS/DEFINING NEXT STEPS In September 1982, the IEEP once again assembled a group of environmental education experts, this time to assess progress since Tbilisi, and to make recommendations for the next three years of the IEEP program. [See The Environmentalist, VoI. 2, No. 4, p. 279.] This time the group was relatively small--29 individuals from places with as diverse environmental needs as USSR, India, China, Lebanon, Thailand, Turkey, Poland, Sweden, Egypt, Brazil and USA. The delegates came from highly industrialized countries whose greatest environmental concerns were acid rain and disposal of exotic hazardous wastes to countries which faced 95% illiteracy and severe fundamental problems with water pollution, desertification and deforestation. Most of the countries are troubled by some combination of both of these types of environmental problems. Nonetheless, as discussions got underway, there was strong agreement among most of the participants that considerable progress had been made by the IEEP program. Specific areas of progress cited included: • the building of a basis for national environmental education policies and strategies; • improved communication and coordination among environmental education interests; • improved quantity and quality of relevant research; • successful development of innovative materials for in-school and out-of-school and adult education programs, and • particularly high benefits where pilot projects had been carried out.
Yet despite this list of accomplishments, there was, if anything an increased sense of urgency regarding continuation of the IEEP program. Two almost contradictory factors seemed to be behind this sense of urgency. One was the increased understanding (and accompanying alarm) of the interactions among environmental problems and their potential multiple negative effects on human as well as natural systems. But the second seemed to have grown out of the successes which had o c c u r r e d - - i t was almost as if in finding out that some of the worst types of environmental problems could be slowed or reversed, gave everyone increased hope and determination that more such problems be solved through improved education. The quality of the advice that was to come from this group was also impressive in its practicality. There was full realization that the present The Environmentalist
economic situation meant limited dollar availability for such work. Thus the focus was on maximizing the use of what had been learned or developed to date, and using existing institutions/ mechanisms as arms for implementation. Specifically, the recommendations developed in Paris suggested:
5. Making particular efforts to work constructively with members of the media in improving the frequency and quality of coverage of the educational aspects of environmental problem solving.
l. That the IEEP concentrate on disseminating high quality, easily replicated, low cost educational materials as opposed to emphasizing the development of additional materials. It was specifically suggested that the IEEP make the best prototypes available, especially to developing nations, with the nations paying for replication and taking responsibility for in-country distribution. 2. That the IEEP accelerate communication among interested parties by continuing Connect as a condensed source of information, and using appropriate other publications to carry more detailed accounts of projects which are relevant to their particular audiences. 3. That the IEEP support the use of existing regional, national and subnational organizations as the long-term implementing mechanisms for the international environmental education program. 4. That the IEEP work towards even greater cooperation among other agencies within the Unesco family, and with relevant non-governmental and professional organizations--especially those which operate on an international basis. 5. That the IEEP take particular pains to work more closely with governmental and non-governmental groups whose focus is nutrition and/or literacy.
The Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Program has contributed substantially to the goal of achieving international environmental education. And when viewed against that background of the other types of technological and sociological advances that are occurring this particular global educational goal appears to be one that can be reached. There is no doubt that progress will be closely linked to successful literacy campaigns. Indeed, collaborative efforts which use environmental education subject matter in such campaigns will help to meet two vitally important global educational goals at the same time. The assessments of needs, the development of prototypical educational materials and national strategies, plus the training sessions, workshops and conferences have all been useful. But possibly the most valuable service that the IEEP has performed is the people and organizational networks that it has stimulated and supported. Through these activities the IEEP has demonstrated that opportunities to collaborate on meeting educational and environmental needs encourages people to go beyond the political barriers and divisive issues which pull us apart, towards solutions which are positive, satisfying and mutually beneficial to all as residents on this interdependent and interrelated planet. The IEEP has helped to move us towards a goal that has perhaps been best stated by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who commented, "The salvation of mankind lies only in making everything the concern of all".
But those of us who are interested in and concerned about improving global environmental education must also look at what we can do to assist the IEEP in its future efforts. These possibilities include: 1. Making sure that our own representatives to Unesco are aware of the value of this program's efforts, and are encouraged to press for its continuation. 2. Encouraging publications and newsletters .of our own professional organizations to carry relevant coverage of IEEP acitivities; and stimulating the editors to inform the IEEP about relevant films, activities, projects, conferences, etc., that appropriate sub-interest groups are undertaking. 3. Contributing to maximizing the cross-fertilization that can take place between relevant professional groups and specialists in environmental education within our own countries or professional networks. For instance, it has been suggested by James Aldrich, co-editor of The Environmentalist, that national committees of Unesco's Man and the Biosphere (MAB) program invite environmental education specialists to join their membership. Such a move would provide the educators with unusually fine access to the latest in environmental problem and management thinking, and could also help to make the scientists who are involved more sensitive to the educational needs associated with their work. 4. Encouraging professional societies, nongovernmental and membership organizations--especially those active on the international s c e n e - - t o assist in meeting the environmental education needs which exist. The IEEP cannot be expected to do it all. Professional societies can contribute to upgrading environmental understandings of their own members, and can reach out to share information with relevant government leaders. It would be particularly helpful if international organizations like the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) would select certain areas of environmental education and concentrate on them. With that organization's access to top level policy-makers in government and industry, these may well be the most appropriate target audiences for their efforts. At any rate, some clear indication of the types of activities that IUCN and other such groups will take on as their responsibility would help the IEEP make best use of the funds and opportunities available to it. Vol. 3, No. 4 ( 1 9 8 3 )
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY Publications concerning the Unesco International Environmental Education Program, Available through Unesco except as noted. Questionnaire for Assessment of Resources for Environmental Education Needs and Priorities for Member States, Paris, Unesco, 1975. International Workshop on Environmental Education, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 1975 Final Report. Educational Documentation and Information, World Trends in Environmental Education, Bulletin of the International Bureau of Education, Uneseo/IBE, Paris, Geneva, 1976. Trends in Environmental Education, Unesco, 1977. Reports of Regional Meetings of Experts on Environmental Education in each of the following Unesco Regions: Latin America and The Caribbean; Asia; Africa; and the Arab States. All Final Reports completed in 1976. 275
Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Programme, Environmental Education Needs and Priorities: Preliminary Studies of the following Unesco Regions: Africa; Asia; and Latin America and the Caribbean, all published in 1976; and Europe, 1977. Report on the North American Regional Seminar on Environmental Education, The Alliance For Environmental Education, published by ERIC/Smeac, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA, 1976. ENVED-4, Education and the Challenge of Environmental Problems, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-5, The Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Programme, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-6, Needs and Priorities in Environmental Education: an International Survey, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-7, Regional Meetings of Experts on Environmental Education: A Synthetic Report, Paris, Unesco, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. ENVED-8, Major Environmental Problems in Contemporary Society, Paris, 1977. Paper presented at the Tbilisi Conference. Unesco, Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, Tbilisi, USSR, 1977, Final Report. Toward an Action Plan: A Report on the Tbilisi Conference on Environmental Education, Federal Interagency Committee on Education, US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1978. [For sale through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. Stock Number 017-080-01838-1.1 International Directory of Individuals Involved in Environmental Education, Unesco/UNEP International Environmental Education Programme, 1977.
276
International Directory of Institutions Active in the Field of Environmental Education, Preliminary Edition, Unesco, UNEP, IPEE, 1977. Reports on Regional and Subregional Training Workshops on Environmental Education in the Following Unesco Regions and Subregions: Africa, 1978; Latin America, 1979; Asia and the Pacific, and the Caribbean, 1980. Man and His Environment: an Overview of Unesco's Involvement, Paris, 1979 (Science Sector). Strategies for Developing an Environmental Education Curriculum: a Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Strategies for the Training of Teachers in Environmental Education: a Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Unesco/UNEP International Programme on Environmental Education and the Training of Engineers, Caracas, 1978. Suggestions for Developing a National Strategy for Environmental Education: a Planning and Management Process, Discussion Guide for Unesco Training Workshops on Environmental Education, 1980. Experimental Module for In-Service Training of Science Teachers and Supervisors in Environmental Education for Secondary Schools, in press/September 1982. Directory of Institutions Active in the Field of Environmental Education, Unesco, Paris, 1981. Connect, a quarterly Unesco/UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter. Note: Persons interested in these publications can write to the Publications Office, Unesco, 7 Place de Fontenoy, Paris, 75700, France. Those interested in any of the pilot projects must request information through their National Commission to Unesco. The IEEP can not communicate directly about these projects except with those serving as Project Managers.
The Environmentalist