Global Action Plan International

Conference on climate literacy
Kiev, 17 November 2009 and
Chernigiv, 18 November 2009
 
Climate change is not a problem
Climate change is often framed as an overshadowing problem. But in fact, it is not a problem but a symptom. It is one of many symptoms of global un-sustainable development. In other words, symptoms of unhealth created by human behaviour – by the millions of decisions taken every day by millions of people.
 
Climate change is often framed as an overshadowing problem. But in fact, it is not a problem but a symptom. It is one of many symptoms of global un-sustainable development. In other words, symptoms of unhealth created by human behaviour – by the millions of decisions taken every day by millions of people.
 
Environmental: climate change, flooding, soil erosion on a massive scale, deforestation, desertification
 
Social: new cynicism, violence, exclusion, marginalization, pandemics, terrorism
 
Economic: poverty, malnutrition, inequality, massive financial crises
 
We know from the field of medicine that treating symptoms can sometimes be helpful – but only as long as the underlying problems are understood, and the treatment is not masking a more serious condition. With flu, for instance, it may be useful to take pain-killers; as long as they don’t mask the onset of complications like pneumonia.
 
Climate education
The best climate education takes the complexity of the ’dis-ease’ into account. It

• Is directed to ’everyone’, understanding that no one group can succeed in turning the tide
• Is action-oriented, encouraging and empowering different stakeholders to take action within their own spheres of influence
• Builds upon a view of teacher and student as co-learners – fellow-travellers on a road of discovery
• Is complex and systemic – for instance it covers not only CO2 but also food production, not only sea levels but also poverty and migration, not only scarcity of oil and gas, but also economic decoupling

Climate education thus fits well within the general scope of ’Education for Sustainable Development’, the focus of a UN Decade 2005-2014. Such education is needed at least at three different levels in society:

1. There is a need for some – not many, but many more than today – ’sustainability experts’, researchers and other specialists
2. There is a need for many more professionals: people with the knowledge and skill to apply SD principles in their daily work; this may include professions as diverse as policy-makers, business leaders, journalists, teachers (of almost any subject), engineers, builders…
3. There is a need for millions and millions of practitioners: people with the knowledge and skill to steadily improve the quality of their personal decisions, to the benefit of the survival of humankind

Climate education is about all of these. By far the biggest challenge is to bring about the revolution in education that is needed to enlist and engage the millions of practitioners, of all ages and in all sections of society.
 
Question 1:
Where is climate education best carried out? In formal or informal settings? Integrated into other subjects, or a separate subject?
There seems now to be a consensus that it needs to be carried out ‘everywhere’, in all topics, both formally and informally. There is however controversy about the need for a separate subject. It can be helpful to consider the parallel to literacy. The skill of reading and writing is integrated into almost all subjects; but first we need to learn and practice the skill in distinct reading and writing lessons.
 
Question 2:
Governments say very fine words while frequently changing regulations at short notice; business hedges its bets and hopes for long-term consistent policy and legislation; and grass-roots get on with unacknowledged education work. This disconnection is a problem because

• Unacknowledged work, while it may involve thousands or even millions of people, does not easily spread. Initiatives that could have broad effects are limited and enclosed within their local context, dependent on a few enthusiasts.
• Inconsistent and short-term policies are hampering the development of commercially viable alternatives to current unsustainable products and services, as well as having a dampening effect on demand for workplace education.

There are exceptions; for instance, the governments of the Netherlands, Norway, and South Korea have all in various ways acknowledged the role of grass-roots action as a possible policy instrument, in addition to the classical instruments of carrots, sticks, and education.
 
Question 3:
Theory and action are emphasized to the exclusion of reflection. As a result, we are not learning fast enough. Each new project begins by reinventing wheels; and many pupils and adult students still leave their classes without learning to reflect upon or learn from their own experience. Indeed, we tend to teach analysis and intellectual skills to the exclusion of synthesis and interpersonal skills – a severe handicap in such a rapidly changing world. How can we bring reflection into the mainstream of education?
 
The real challenge
But carbon neutrality is not enough. Only reducing carbon emissions by 80-90% is not enough; not even if we include the full complexity of the question. Beyond mere survival is the key question: what kind of society do we want? If we have no vision beyond survival, the future will be bleak indeed.
But of course we do have bolder visions. Bringing them together, across all the sectoral barriers, and bringing them into reality: that’s the real challenge of climate education.
 
Marilyn Mehlmann
November 2009