Sustaining Environmental Education: the contribution of Non- Government Organisations (NGOs)

Abstract

Informal environmental education, including personal involvement in NGO environmental action, can be an effective way of increasing understanding of environmental issues and sustainability. NGO projects help provide practical environmental education to environmentally-aware people who have built their careers in other areas. In this case study of a community-based land reclamation research project, supported by the NGO Earthwatch, analysis of the motivations and experiences of project volunteers shows that their aims include making a personal contribution to environmental welfare, networking with like-minded individuals, and that they expect to carry their new understanding back into their everyday lives to influence the people they work with and students that they teach.

Introduction

Environmental education is not just a classroom activity. Certainly, it is possible to teach, in a formal classroom setting, about the environment and it is also possible to build upon this understanding through the involvement of students in occasional field trips. However, this kind of environmental learning, inevitably, treats the ‘environment’ like a ‘butterfly in a museum case’; it becomes something to be examined from an objective and external viewpoint, something outside the student in the same way that it is outside the classroom (cf. Mitford, 2001, p7). Equally, it becomes something that can be forgotten when the class or course is over, something to be packed away with the second-hand textbooks and ‘used’ essays.

Environmental education can be effective only if it is constructed as a lifelong process rather than one restricted to the few years of formal education. Ideally, it should become part of the learner’s way of life and an aspect of their personal striving for self-improvement (cf. Naess, 1987).

NGOs in Environmental Education

NGOs are self-created social groups that combine people in a shared mission. In general, NGOs are about direct action, which may be political, religious, social or environmental. Action is instructive and NGOs stand for the belief that they can improve the world by ‘thinking globally and acting locally’ (Holliday et al., 2000). At UNCED (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development - “Rio”), the NGO Forum’s set of alternative treaties committed them to a process “of educational transformation aimed at involving ourselves, our communities and nations in creating equitable and sustainable societies” (UNCED NGO Forum 1993: 5.1). Environmental education,“a continuous learning process” would include developing “an ethical awareness of all forms of life… a respect for all life cycles and impose limits on humans’ exploitation of other forms of life” (UNCED NGO Forum 1993: 5.21).

Today, UNESCO includes the educational benefits of involvement in NGO action as one of two key sectors of environmental education. In UNESCO’s definition, non-formal environmental education includes any organised educational activity outside the established formal educational system and particularly that developed by groups that assemble themselves for reasons other than learning (Fortner, 2001).

NGOs are most famous for their campaigns against destructive developments. However, many work in less media-engaged ways on the harder, slower tasks of environmental conservation, education and reconstruction, often trying to weave research and local action into a consciousness-raising, ultimately policy-changing wholeness. Many NGOs seek to empower communities to take control and management of their own habitats (c.f. Bunch 1992, ABLH (Kenya) in Hellin, 2003, Cambray 2000). Some, like Coral Key and Earthwatch, try to involve volunteers in applied research, arguing that problem-solving is the best way to awaken a holistic appreciation of an environmental and sustainability challenge.

Case Study: Earthwatch and its ‘Reclaiming the Land’ Project

Earthwatch, a major NGO based near Boston, USA with branches in England, Australia, Japan (and formerly Russia until the office closed during the 1990s) is the world’s largest NGO provider of funds for field research. It supports more than 135 research projects in around 50 countries. Earthwatch provides support, not through cash but volunteer field assistants who help with the leg-work of data collection (Figure 1). Since 1971, it has recruited over 65,000 volunteers for 2,800 field research projects (Earthwatch Institute (Europe) 2001a, p2).

Earthwatch’s “Reclaiming the Land” project has run since 1991, in Wales and, for two years, in Bulgaria (Eisner, 1992; Cook, 2002). It tackles an international problem, the degradation of environmental quality on lands that have been ‘reclaimed’ after surface coal-mining (Haigh, 2000a). It researches the self-sustainable reconstruction of these lands and strives to build upon the ancient technology of forest-fallowing for the reconstruction of soils (Haigh, 2000b, Flege, 2000). In 12 years, the project has involved more than 350 volunteers from 21 nations.

Figure 1 Tree measuring during the Varteg forestation test plots during the EarthWatch camp of 1998

Methods

This study examines those things that the Earthwatch volunteers feel they gain by way of environmental education. Information is gathered at the application stage, when the volunteers sign in to a project, and the evaluation phase, when volunteers report back to sponsors, usually some weeks after the project experience.

Earthwatch project application forms include space for two relevant questions. One asks the would-be volunteer to take 50-words to:“Please introduce yourself…” and tell their own story (cf. Tilbury et al., 2002). Another asks them to “Tell us why you chose this project? What are your expectations? What do you hope to contribute?” Responses are analysed by classifying their content into general themes; then scoring the number of times each occurs. In practice, this has meant that each record generates around 3 scores.

Later, after each field camp, the volunteers are asked to evaluate their experiences, to describe their most and least positive experiences on the project and also the personal, professional and educational impact of the project upon themselves. These comments have been classified in the same fashion as the registration forms, using - as far as possible - the same categories.

Results

Earthwatch says that it would like to send along copies of every application form and evaluation form for interrogation in this piece of research. The fact remains that they do not always manage to do this - there are usually more volunteers on a trip than either application forms or evaluations forms might indicate. Therefore, this analysis is based on 75 application forms (Table 1) and 31 evaluation returns (Table 2).

Table 1 Analysis of Project Registration Forms (1991–2001)

“Please tell us why you chose this project? What are your expectations? What do you hope to contribute?”

Interest in subject (environmental reconstruction / ‘healing the Earth’) (26)

Environmentally concerned - hope to help welfare of world (25)

Build technical understanding of environmental problems (19)

Hope to contribute to ‘worthwhile’ activity (17)

Enjoy company of like-minded/interesting people (17)

Enjoy outdoor activities (12)

Work as part of a team (11)

Personal satisfaction / enjoyment (9)

Commitment to local area of project (9)

Ecotourism /adventure (9)

Working with nature (8)

Sample size: 75

Female: 43; Male 27.

Age: <20: 1; 20–40: 27, 40–60: 36, >60: 12

Nationality: UK: 39; USA: 23; W. Europe: 8; E. Europe: 2; Australia: 2; Africa: 1

Discussion

An earlier stakeholder analysis concluded that volunteers’ motives ranged from a wish to help conserve the environment, through meeting others with similar beliefs, and a recreational escape from an office job (Haigh, 1998). The field camps were a holiday experience less vacuous than a conventional beach and a few found a new hobby or cause to support (Haigh, 1998, p.67). Here also, the volunteers emphasise that who they work with is as critical as what they are doing. Many wished to interact with like-minded people, both in the team and in the local community. They felt that they learnt as much from discussions amongst themselves as from any specific project. They also sought the camaraderie of teamwork, the opportunity to work with nsature and to conduct physical labour out of doors instead of within an office. Beyond this, many signed up because they had a concern for the environment and a wish to help ‘heal the Earth’.

Table 2 Analysis of Post-Project Evaluation Returns

“What was your most positive experience?”

Enjoyed company of like-minded/interesting people (17)

Sense of achievement (9)

Working as part of a team (9)

Being a valued part of the project (6)

Involvement with local community / heritage (6)

Increased technical understanding (6)

Optimistic approach of work (5)

Seeing progress of project (2nd visit) (4)

Working with nature (4)

New experience (4)

What was your least positive experience?

Needed more time to spend with the project (7)

More instruction in field (4)

Sample n= 31

Female: 20 Male: 9 Don’t Know: 1.

UK: 23; USA: 6, W. Europe: 1; Don’t Know: 1

Education for Environmental Sustainability

The real priority for environmental education is to promote a change in attitude towards the environment (cf. Bonnett, 2002; Schultz, 2000). As Binn and Wright (2002, p82) note “sustainable development requires citizens who understand and care for the environment and play an active role in its management”. The need is for an active approach that communicates the dynamism and indeterminacy of natural processes and also recognises that there is work that individuals can and should do (Berry, 1999, p. 84–85).

NGOs emerge as social pressure groups dedicated to problem solving, action and change. In general, they incline towards holism and espouse environmental changes that are inspired less by economics than the quality of life, be that expressed in human or more radical ecosystem terms.

True, NGOs face many problems. Most are financially stretched, which means that they need and rely on sponsorship, public, private and corporate. At present, NGOs stand alone outside the economic system; uniquely able to resist the sacrifice of long-term environmental welfare to short-term economic gratification. However, as they grow, so do their economic needs expand, so too their tendency to compromise (cf. Cook, 2002). This trend is, however, resisted by NGO supporters. These are concerned people, motivated by belief, who really believe that by ‘acting locally’, they can help improve the quality of the environment.

Conclusion

NGO environmental activism provides the most valuable agency for non-formal environmental education. Those who become involved, especially in problem-solving work, often deal directly with the core issues of environmental sustainability. However, the environmental education that NGOs provide differs greatly from the factual, technical and passive shadow provided in most university classrooms. This informal NGO environmental education involves the active sharing of ideas between concerned participants and the direct realisation that environmental quality can be improved by personal intervention.

Acknowledgements

Thanks go to Earthwatch (Europe) for their long-term sponsorship of the author’s team’s research on land reclamation and the provision of internal documents to assist this study. Special thanks also go to Earthwatch co-workers: Heather Reed, Kip D’Aucourt, Susan Powell, Willemina Panhuis, Ben and Ceri Sansom, Pam and Richard Sourtherden, Keith Pampling, Kath Blake, Dr Pat Woodruff, Frances Farrugia, Dr Allison Flege, Elizabeth Hatton, Chris Bull, Gill Wilding and many more.