A response to Scott's concerns about the relevance of environmental education research: applying social–ecological systems thinking and consilience to defining research goals

Abstract

In William Scott's plenary address at the World Environmental Education Conference, he expressed concerns about the relevance of environmental education research in a world facing global environmental and demographic change. In responding to Scott's concerns, I argue that addressing challenges related to development and the environment requires examining EE goals at multiple levels as well as bridging diverse disciplines. I further suggest that integrating social‐ecological systems and other approaches in environmental education research may provide a means for consilience among potentially divisive environmental education practice and research traditions. In so doing, I hope to spark debate about possibilities for an environmental education research agenda and learning organisation that spurs action relevant to concerns about the environment, individuals, and their communities.

Keywords:

• consilience
• social–ecological systems
• resilience
• research goals

Acknowledgements

I thank my colleague Keith Tidball for his long‐term collaboration in developing many of the ideas expressed in this commentary, and my Ph.D. student Alexey Kudryavtsev and colleague Ron Meyers for critical review of the manuscript. I also thank Alan Reid for his invitation to write this commentary and helpful suggestions.

Funding for portions of this work was contributed by the National Science Foundation Informal Science Education Program (ESI 0125582) and Federal Formula Fund programs of the US Department of Agriculture.