Memorandum from the Trade Union Sustainable
Development Advisory Committee (TUSDAC) working group
"LEARNING THE
SUSTAINABILITY LESSON"
INTRODUCTION
The members of the Trade Union Sustainable Development
Advisory Committee (TUSDAC) working group welcomes the establishment
of this EAC select committee inquiry into education for sustainable
development and the opportunity to contribute to it. As the Committee
will be aware, TUSDAC was established by the Government in 1999
to give trade unions a forum for their views and ideas on sustainable
development and its achievement—at work, in particular.
For more details of TUSDAC and its work, see http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/tusdac/index.htm
Necessarily, our submission focuses on sustainability
at work and its delivery through learning. We fully recognise,
however, the contribution that both formal and informal learning
will inevitably make outside the workplace—at school and
college, in the community and in the home. The views the TUSDAC
working group expresses here are by no means new and have been
voiced in the past wherever people have been prepared to listen,
including at meetings of the Sustainable Development Education
Panel (SDEP).
The vision of TUSDAC of sustainability at work
predicates every employer and workplace operating sustainably.
Each would boast a workforce that understands the economic, social
and personal disadvantages of continuing to work unsustainably
and appreciates the counter benefits of changing to sustainable
working. Each would know how to work sustainably at all levels
and would do so.
TUSDAC is amongst those who believe such a scenario
unattainable without the delivery of sustainable development learning
right across the UK workforce. Rather the debate focuses on whether
sustainable development should be treated as a distinct subject
in itself or by the integration of its overarching concepts—its
fresh approach to looking at and doing things—into all other
areas of training provision. TUSDAC believes neither route to
be mutually exclusive and both approaches to be necessary.
Indeed, it is TUSDAC's view that:
— sustainable development learning
must become embedded in the qualifications, training and practice
of everyone at work, much as have health and safety and equal
opportunities over the years;
— all interested parties, including
Government departments and NGOs, professionals, employers and
trade unions, must promote and work together to deliver, accredit
and reward learning that imparts SD knowledge, skills and practice
to the workforce—and be themselves encouraged, helped and
rewarded for innovation, good practice and joint working; and
— day-to-day management and decision-making
within industry and business must be won across to longer-term
sustainability and a triple bottom-line approach and away from
historical short termism and the quick financial fix.
THE OBSTACLES
A key obstacle to progress within the workplace—as
elsewhere—is the lack of understanding at all levels of
what sustainable development is and what it means for an organisation's
objectives, stakeholders and ways of working. The net result is
the failure of many employers and their workforces to commit to
sustainability.
Ignorance and confusion abound. The terminology
of sustainable development—even the phrase itself—cloaks
rather than lays bare its message. The results are plain to see.
Many stakeholders in the workplace feel that they know little
or nothing about the subject. Others fail to see its relevance
to themselves and situation they are in—perceiving it as
the province of government, scientists, NGOs or international
agencies. Others again view even the most basic aspects of sustainability
as an obscure science rather than simple good housekeeping, effective
resource management and a recognition of social and ethical obligations.
Some individuals and organisations are even making a contribution
to sustainable development already—and do not realise it.
Part of the problem is the overarching, all-pervasive
nature of sustainable development—the sum rather than the
constituent parts. Many employers and trade unions, for example,
recognise and are making efforts to shoulder their environmental
responsibilities. Instances of this are already well-documented—at
B&Q and Interface Flooring, for example. Some organisations
have taken action voluntarily; others have acted as a result of
pressure from without—the stick of legislation and the carrot
of incentive. Many also acknowledge their social and ethical responsibilities—the
Co-operative Bank and the newer and smaller social enterprises
centred on Merseyside, amongst them. And all employers today would
recognise the impact of globalisation on their organisations.
The same holds true for trade unions, too—as representative
bodies and as employers themselves. The various strands of sustainable
development are often in place, but without the necessary unifying
vision and coherent framework for action.
In the majority of businesses and commercial
organisations, single, financial bottom-line considerations still
dominate boardroom and management decision-making. The demands
of financial short-termism outweigh longer-term considerations
and contribute to lack of vision and forward planning. This short-termism
can combine with the forces of apathy, inertia, resistance to
change and a curative rather than preventive approach to problem-solving
to form a potent barrier to new ideas and ways of working—even
those whose time has come.
In the boardroom, this problem is compounded
by the business case for sustainability not being widely understood
and the tools that could help to deliver sustainable business
decisions and working practices being poorly publicised and supported.
Sustainable development is all to often seen as a liability that
will add to competitive pressures and get in the way of profits,
with little to offer but bad news—extra resourcing and implementation
costs, additional workload and all the "don't do this or
else" associations of its environmental agenda.
Some important developments in the field of
learning for sustainable development give out a message of exclusivity
that is directly counter to the spirit and practice of Learning
to Last. The danger of awareness and excellence becoming seen
as the province of an exclusive and progressive elite needs to
be avoided at all costs. If learning for sustainable development
fails to develop as an inclusive and shared experience, it is
guaranteed to be a limited one.
A further problem is that at all levels—national,
regional and, especially, local—information, support, guidance,
examples of good practice and training support for business have
been lacking, as well as the resources, in terms of both people
and money, to support sustainable development capacity building.
For trade unions, a recent TUC survey[1]showed
that workforces were keen to do much more on sustainable development
issues, not least in terms of the environment. They felt hampered,
however, by not just by a lack of resources, but by the lack of
a statutory right to play a positive role within the workplace
over environmental issues—as exists for health and safety,
for example—and to train for that role. Obtaining these
rights is a key objective for the TUC and for TUSDAC.
The Government's 1999 sustainable development
strategy, targets and indicators, currently under review in the
light of last year's World Summit, provide a sound springboard
for action. To ensure a real culture change in the UK, however,
the Government needs to send out an altogether clearer message
supported by the appropriate economic and statutory instruments.
It must also put more effort into co-ordinated communication and
education, if it is to win hearts and minds and set the right
supportive framework for stakeholders to act.
THE SOLUTIONS
The short-term benefits as well as the long-term
value of working towards sustainability and learning for sustainable
development need to be explained and publicised more effectively.
Better use could be made of emerging good practice—case
studies of employers adopting more sustainable practices and the
learning. In particular, there is a wealth of good practice in
the field of waste minimisation and a greener approach to energy
requirements in many different sectors of the economy that might
be taken advantage of. True sustainability is a win/win situation,
not a loss scenario. The dual message needs to be got across to
employers that sustainability can be good for the bottom line
in present day terms, but that triple bottom-line (social and
environmental as well as financial) accounting is the way forward
and will deliver for organisations in the longer term.
There are key developments in the field of sustainable
development learning as well as sustainable development itself
that need to be publicised and built upon to promote, encourage
and enthuse potential "champions" within working organisations.
Courses have already been developed to address professional requirements
in relation to sustainable development learning, eg the Professional
Practice for Sustainable Development Foundation Course and its
sequel for the finance sector developed with and for Barclays
Bank. Qualifications in sustainable development like those developing
through NCFE (in partnership with the Environment Agency, Groundwork
UK/Manchester, the Black Environment Network and The Natural Step)
to Foundation, Intermediate and Advanced level, are relevant to
workplace as well as community learning.
Professional bodies themselves are increasingly
aware of the importance of sustainable development and bringing
it to the forefront of their qualification/accreditation processes
and their practice (IMechE, ICE, CIWEM, IEMA, amongst them). Indeed,
a group of professional institutions have already formed themselves
into a Sustainability Alliance with the aim of jointly addressing
the needs of professionals in relation to sustainable development
learning and practice.
There is a general feeling in the workplace
that sustainable development and the learning for it are in the
realms of rocket science—theoretically complex, difficult
to understand, time-consuming and expensive, necessitating the
introduction of convoluted systems and massive upheaval. Both
need to be demystified and explained more simply. A less unambiguous,
more accessible language delivered through farther-reaching, more
effective channels of communication will overcome a key problem
blocking the way to an understanding of what sustainable development
is and how to become more sustainable.
People from all walks of life at every level
within the world of work need practical, down-to-earth information
to be able to know and understand:
— what sustainable development and
sustainable development learning look like and why is it crucial
that everyone is involved—the big global as well as the
local issues and how they interact;
— how to work towards sustainability
through learning, how they and others will benefit and how they
will recognise the benefits in practice;
— where to turn for advice and help,
the necessary skills, financial support, etc. and where best practice
can be found and shared; and
— how they will know that their contribution
has delivered.
Indeed, if sustainability is ideally approached
as an integral issue requiring an integrated response, there has
to be a one-stop-shop approach to providing information and advice
that reflects this. There is still an inadequate body of knowledge
about what effective learning for sustainable development looks
like, and what knowledge there is, is not well shared. The problem
is compounded by the fragmentation of the many ground-breaking,
but disparate efforts of various players to support and deliver.
There is uncertainty as to who is doing what and where. Examples
of good practice and excellence need to be discovered and promoted
more effectively—and a well-publicised locus for them created.
Many employers, trade unions and professions
are starting down the road to sustainable development learning
and discovering their own methodologies and what works for them.
The Sustainability Alliance has already been mentioned, but valuable
work is also under way through TUSDAC. TUSDAC, for example, has
been working with Action Energy and the Carbon Trust to develop
training materials for trade unionists wishing to engage with
environmental aspects of sustainable development in their workplace.
The aim is to provide courses across all trade unions, based around
those materials, either through the unions themselves or through
the education service of the TUC. This delivery, however, has
funding implications and raises other key issues such as how to
secure paid release for trade union members keen to learn about
environmental issues and sustainability.
There are important developments, too, at a
European and an international level—certainly, the European
Trade Union Committee and the Global Union Federations are taking
an active interest and promoting sustainable practice across national
borders, as are their employer-led counterparts. There is a desperate
need for partnerships and joint working, at this and all other
levels, to avoid unnecessary duplication and to share, build upon
and extend good practice.
Sustainable development learning needs to be
adequately resourced—at least at the outset. At present,
the incentives are too few and too low to encourage many employers,
trade unions and the professions to pursue sustainable business
practice and the learning needed to support it. Resourcing suggests
financial support, but advice and practical help, within easy
reach, are just as important.
The Government is committed to the development
of a learning society and the concept of lifelong learning—extending
to everyone access to learning and the opportunity for upgrading
their skills right throughout life. The emphasis on workforce
development is prompted by the sheer pace of change at work—the
demands of globalisation, the customisation of goods and services,
technological innovation and demographic change, both in public
service and the private sector. This effort to overturn the effects
of years of educational neglect provides a major opportunity for
pushing forward sustainability learning in the workplace.
The upheaval in the world of education presents
real opportunities and challenges, but also runs the risk of breeding
uncertainty and a tentative approach to breaking new ground. The
challenge the Government faces is to succeed in putting learning
for sustainable development at the heart of its educational commitment
and strategy. It needs to ensure that the commitment carries through
to every planner, organiser, funder, promoter and provider of
learning—its own departments, the Sector Skills Councils
and Learning and Skills Councils, the University for Industry
and Learndirect, colleges and universities, employers, trade unions
and professional bodies.
The role of Learning and Skills Councils and
the Sector Skills Councils is particularly important. Both should
also have clear objectives and targets with measurable outcomes
demonstrating progress towards learning for sustainable development.
A commitment through learning to sustainable development should
be a condition of all funding, and all projects should be properly
appraised in terms of their contribution to local, regional and
national sustainability targets and indicators as well as employer
and industry needs. Many valuable funding mechanisms are already
in place, such as course accreditation, governmental funding of
partnerships at work and the Union Learning Fund. The question
is rather what priority will be put on learning for sustainable
development and its support against the needs and demands of the
UK workforce for basic literacy and numeracy, ICT competence,
sector-related skills, etc.
Sector Skills Councils need to carry out an
assessment of the current sustainable skills and the future sustainable
development skilling needs of various sector workforces and to
re-design skills-based training provision accordingly, building
that provision around the essential elements of learning to last.
Course accreditation, at whatever level or point of delivery,
should carry a requirement for the assessment and proof of the
funded training programme's contribution to learning for sustainable
development. For this to be carried out effectively, it is essential
that the full range of Sector Skills Councils be established as
quickly as possible.
The University for Industry (UfI) / Learndirect,
with its role in the development of new ways of learning and new
qualifications, e-learning more generally and the further potential
for wider participation broadband technology for workforce development
offers, all provide a unique opportunity to integrate learning
for sustainable development into workforce and professional development.
The UfI / Learndirect have already produced a modular programme
entitled "Sustainable Development for All". This promising
start needs to be assessed, built on and expanded.
Universities have a vital part to play in the
establishment and development of learning for sustainable development,
particularly through the creation of national and international
research centres to inform future sustainability planning and
skills development. Both public and private sector providers should
be encouraged to integrate the development of sustainable skills
into the creation of centres of vocational excellence.
Accounting for sustainable development and the
learning for it must be a transparent part of business reporting.
Here, the Government might usefully act to promote and extend
the good practice already adopted by the many companies that include
explicit statements in their annual reports about their progress
towards reduced environmental impact and sustainability.
Trade unions have long been pioneers of workers'
education and their involvement is being revitalised by their
key role in encouraging and helping to create new initiatives
and learning opportunities at work. This is a role the Government
has recognised in the establishment of the Union Learning Fund
and, more recently, the appointment of Union Learning Representatives.
The sustainability of a workplace project is already a factor
that weighs in favour of its chances of receiving support from
the Union Learning Fund. This at present only involves a project
having to declare that its life and the outcomes it delivers will
continue beyond the funding period. This is a very different test
from the one required—one that demonstrates the contribution
the project will make to learning for sustainable development.
The appointment of Union Learning Reps to date
constitutes a great sustainability opportunity missed. Many have
already received preliminary training through their union or,
in many cases, via the TUC—without learning for sustainable
development having taken its rightful place on the learning agenda
and in the pantheon of training needs analysis. This situation
is not beyond retrieval. Further information, advice and training
need to be delivered to existing, trained reps to rectify the
omission and the training for new reps needs to give learning
for sustainable development the weight and the course time it
demands.
All the necessary developments above indicate
the value of getting the key players together to partake in joined-up
thinking and joint working. The CBI (perhaps through ACBE), the
TUC and trade unions (perhaps through TUSDAC), the relevant government
departments, the learning providers and funders, and other interested
parties might usefully come together to devise a simple strategy
to which all are committed and all know to be taking place. Such
a combination of interests might even jointly "sponsor"
a combination of learning centres already committed to work in
this field, to develop and promote a basic framework for learning
for sustainable development at work. This is the level at which
a co-ordinated, national strategy for sustainable development
learning within the workplace might best be delivered to have
the maximum impact. Work at this level within trade unions is
already being actively encouraged by SDEP and TUSDAC, through
the provision of simple information and advice on the delivery
of education for sustainable development.
There might also be a role for such a combination
of interests in contributing to a simple and relevant approach
to and language for sustainable development needed to reduce the
confusion and mystification that get in the way of understanding
what it is and how to go about it.
In terms of the Government's perceived commitment
to and performance in delivering learning for sustainable development
across departments, practice does not yet reflect rhetoric. It
is not business alone that feels the constraints of short-term
targets. Policy-makers within government and lay agencies do,
too. Long-term strategic objectives need to be set from the top
down, to be understood and their priority appreciated, if the
current wave of educational reform is to help to deliver sustainable
development learning. There is always a danger that commitment
might be highjacked by events, such as the threat of conflict
in Iraq. Whilst, inevitably, priorities will vary over time and
events may get in the way, learning for sustainable development
needs to be a permanent, overriding Government commitment—and
to be seen as such.
A Government commitment to education for sustainable
development would be the more visible for the setting of targets,
such as a realistic timescale by which:
(a) learning for sustainable development
should be integral to:
— best practice in every area of teaching
and learning for work;
— all work-related educational frameworks,
plans and funding; and
— all workplace-based or work-related
training—professional, management, trade union, etc—professional
and workforce development, upskilling and qualifications, and
all learning aimed at and for those in or preparing for work,
whoever the provider;
(b) all facilitators of learning should be
expected to account for their expenditure of public funds in terms
of learning for sustainable development and able to chart their
progress against agreed sustainable development objectives and
key performance indicators; and
(c) all work-related organisations should
be reporting, at least annually, on the progress they and their
workforce are making in developing the knowledge, skills and competencies
to deliver sustainable practices.
12 February 2003
1 Not printed here. See TUC Environment Survey (2002).
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/tusdac/pdf/tuc_env_survey.pdf Back
|
