Memorandum from Forum for the Future
1. ABOUT FORUM
FOR THE
FUTURE
1.1. Forum for the Future is a UK sustainable
development charity, founded by leading campaigners Sara Parkin,
Jonathon Porritt and Paul Ekins in 1996, with a mission to accelerate
change to a sustainable way of life. Since 1992 when governments
agreed on sustainable development as the overarch policy goal
for tackling accelerating environmental degradation and persistent
human poverty and inequality, Forum for the Future sees the challenge
to be that of taking a positive approach to implementing the many
solutions that already exist.
1.2 We work in partnerships with decision
makers through on programmes and projects to help integrate sustainability
into all key decision-making bodies in society. Our main partnership
programmes are with business (including The Natural Step), local
and regional government, higher education. We run also a range
of projects with a number of partners, including national government
and European bodies, for example: Digital Futures, The Engineer
of the 21st Century Inquiry, London Principles (for investors),
Measuring Transformation (for everyone), H2GO (hydrogen futures).
2. ABOUT FORUM
FOR THE
FUTURE EDUCATION
AND LEARNING
PROGRAMME
2.1 As we are an educational charity most
of our work and experience is relevant to the inquiry of the Environmental
Audit Committee's inquiry, but our Education and Learning Programme
exemplifies our approach to learning for sustainability. Just
some examples, we:
2.1.1 focus on learner needs and style of
learning (one size does not fit all).
2.1.2 take an approach based on sufficient
knowledge and understanding, rather than daunting volumes of information.
2.13 offer intellectual and practical techniques
for thinking about and implementing sustainable development, and
support learners in maintaining consistence as they tailor them
to their own circumstances and possibilities.
2.1.4 recommend that sustainable development
"literacy" or "competencies" should be integrated
into all taught disciplines and types of work; being able to operationalise
sustainable development is not a "new" profession, but
a basic skill everybody should have.
2.2 Our experience includes six years of
a pioneering work-based Leadership in Sustainable Development
Masters programme, described by Professor Tim O'Riordan, University
of East Anglia and member Sustainable Development Commission as
"the best run masters programme I know". We also run
a Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability, with 18 UK
universities, ranging in type and geography from Cambridge to
Aberdeen, Newcastle to Surrey institute of Art and Design, Loughborough
to Cardiff. This programme is funded by all the UK Higher Education
Funding Councils and works with partners on curriculum and research,
plus the operation of what are big businesses with significant
impact, socially, environmentally and economically, on the communities
where they are located. The objective is for partners to achieve
their strategic objectives through a positive engagement with
sustainable development. www.heps.org.uk
2.3 Our various projects include: The Engineer
of the 21st Century Inquiry which works with young engineers on
their future needs using a structured action learning model; SustainIT,
an on-line learning support tool designed with Surrey County Council,
BAA pls, and HM Customs and Excise. Last year the Chilean government
asked us to help integrate sustainability into ALL the curricula
of a major university—culturally possible there but still
a dream in the UK! It was also a unique opportunity for us to
develop some of our existing curriculum development tools and
techniques and to design a new one.
2.4 Sara Parkin, is a Programme Director
of Forum for the Future, has over 30 years experience in this
area and was awarded an OBE for services to education and sustainability
in 2001. Her seven-strong team in Education and Learning is headed
by Dr Andy Johnston, who has a PhD in environmental performance
indicators, and experience in design of distance learning in environmental
management for business.
3. SUMMARY OF
RESPONSE TO
QUESTIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Summary
3.1.2 The main message of our reflections
on the EAC inquiry questions is that lessons do have to be learnt.
Why, for example, despite education being regularly cited as a
key element of meeting the challenge of sustainable development
since the first Earth Summit in 1972, has it failed to arrive
at the centre of the political stage? The UNESCO decade of Education
for Sustainable Development is welcome, but it doesn't start until
2005, and more delay is unjustifiable. Not least because good
sustainability practice makes sense economically as well as benefiting
community and the environment in other ways.
3.1.3 We find the dilatory approach of the
DfES to be verging on the negligent. Sara Parkin and Forum for
the Future led the group that, in 1996 and for the Conservative
government, developed a number of proposals, including the establishment
of the Sustainable Development Education Panel. Our hopes were
high when the incoming Labour government announced that it would
indeed establish the panel, but we have been sorely disappointed
that its work did not receive more substantial support from the
DfES which hampered the impact the panel might have made. Other
departments, with the exception of DETR, do not promote ESD at
as far as we can see, either for their own staff, or more widely.
As a consequence, apart from isolated examples (sustainable development
eventually entering the school curriculum in the citizenship strand;
Learning and Skills Council, like Regional Development Agencies
having sustainable development as an objective) there are very
few examples of sustainable development being integrated into
learning programmes. (see end of Q4 for some examples)
3.1.4 The obstacles to public engaging and
understanding the sustainable development challenge in a way that
changes their choices and behaviour are deep and complex. First
because `education and exhortation' are not sufficient. Building
the competency and confidence of people to act differently (from
top civil servants to individual members of the public) means
giving them the capacity to work out themselves what to do—at
work, where they live—in a way that is consistent with sustainability.
This means providing sufficient knowledge and skills rather than
huge volumes of information, setting standards and frameworks
that can be trusted, and showing that the government itself is
working to make it easier and cheaper for people to "go green".
3.1.5 So, yes, a national strategy is needed.
It will not require additional structures, if it has adequate
resources and an authoritative and trustworthy leadership, based
either in DfES (with sufficient powers) or the Cabinet Office.
3.1.6 There is a world of difference between
an awareness raising campaign, and a properly designed and run
change management programme. It is the latter that will deliver
transformed (ie permanently changed) behaviour, not the former.
3.1.7 Some good practice does exist, but
it is patchy and rarely addresses the key elements of sustainability
together. Resolving the conflicts between our economic, environmental
and social goals (which is what sustainable development is all
about) will not happen (and opportunities to innovate will be
missed) unless all the elements are addressed at the same time.
3.2 Recommendations:
3.2.1 That government change tack away from
supply-led approach to ESD to a learner-focused one in order to
move beyond exhortaion and awareness raising to build the capacity
of people to act differently. This recognises the most important
entry point in any change management programme—giving people
the competencies and confidence to act differently.
3.2.2 That the focus be on what people need
to know—in their work and where they live—and in particular
give them tools and techniques for thinking about and practically
implementing their own solutions in a way that maintains the consistence
with sustainability. The goal is to achieve sufficient understanding
and skills to act differently, moving away from disempowering
volumes of information.
3.2.3 That thes tools and techniques support
the fact that the key elements of sustainability must be addressed
together as an indivisible and ubiquitous set.
3.2.4 That a national strategy set the ball
rolling to:
3.2.4.1 position sustainability "competency"
or "literacy" as a basic/transferable skill for all,
not a profession or separate expertise.
3.2.4.2 develop a framework and minimum
standards in terms of outcomes that will help demanders to specify
sustainability learning opportunities (students, employers, course
procurers) and encourage providers to take innovative approaches
to delivery, accreditation and quality assurance.
3.2.4.3 work through existing structures
(schools, further and higher education, professional development
and informal learning routes) but provide trusted, authoritative
and well resourced leadership in DfES if sufficient authority
and powers are possible over a long period of time, otherwise
in the Cabinet Office.
3.2.4.4 Intervene directly and immediately
to build the capacity of people in key leadership and policy roles,
including those with influence on design, procurement, accreditation
and evaluation of learning programmes of all types. This will
also help create demonstration programmes.
3.2.4.5 That an understanding of the difference
between a short campaign and a longer term change management programme
designed around outcomes, govern the way the government proceeds.
3.2.4.6 That systems for logging different
contributions be established and good practice be recognised and
celebrated—wherever it occurs.
4. RESPONSE TO
QUESTIONS
4.1 Is a lack of public engagement and understanding
a real obstacle to the Government's progress on its sustainable
development agenda? Have their been any studies to show this?
Please refer to practical examples where possible.
4.1.1 Yes, lack of public engagement and
understanding is an obstacle. And yes, some studies show this.
See work of ESD Panel and SDC on communication for example.
4.1.2 However research in this area often
misses two key points. First, sustainable development is not synonymous
with environment. Secondly, if an individual (or organisation)
doesn't have the confidence or competence to know how to do things
differently on Monday, then no amount of understanding about the
problem of unsustainable development will change behaviour.
4.1.3 The obstacle to change is not necessarily
that people are unaware of the problem, it is that they do now
know how to implement solutions in whatever sphere of influence
you may have. We would argue further that it is not simply a matter
of sharing "best practice" (which is rarely fully transferable
and implies that there is no better practice to be had). It is
about equipping individuals with intellectual and practical tools
and techniques (related to sustainability) that give them the
confidence to make different choices and design new practice wherever
they are.
4.1.4 In our experience, many people do
have some idea about what sustainable development means, however
incoherently expressed. For example, few people will argue against
living in a society that is prosperous and just, has safe enjoyable
communities, and a life-supporting environment—at the same
time (see various Agenda 21 visioning and planning processes).
This is only sustainable development put another way. Crucially
though, it is only about getting these things together, rather
than in trade off. Yet, the government's four bullet-pointed objectives
for sustainable development are mostly represented and handled
separately (by government, in taught courses in schools, colleges,
universities, and elsewhere), without the crucial phrase that
defines them as an indivisible and ubiquitous set.
4.1.5 What is it people need to know—in
their work, where they live—to achieve more sustainable
outcomes from their choices and decisions? What is it that helps
(or prevents) them considering outcomes that are good for people,
the environment and the bank balance as an integrated set? What
do they think needs to change for them to do this? How do they
learn best? These are the sort of questions that need to be asked
if learning programmes of any sort are to have the desired outcome—transformed
(ie permanently changed) behaviour. This is our experience in
Forum for the Future. The Chartered Institute of Personal and
Development, as well as a number of academic institutions, have
a literature on learner-focused learning programmes.
4.2 Is there a need for a national strategy
for education for sustainable development? Would additional infrastructure
be required to deliver a coherent, national strategy?
4.2.1 Yes there is definitely a need for
a national strategy. But not on ESD. We prefer to use Learning
for Sustainable Development (LSD). It may seem like semantics,
but it symbolises substantial changes that need to be made. For
example:
4.2.2 a move away from the supplier driven
approach to a learner-focused (demand or outcome driven) one as
we propose in our answer to question 1 a change from programmes
heavy on content and problems (and guilt!) and light on solutions,
to ones that major on tools and techniques that help people work
out for themselves how to do and decide differently, without losing
consistency with sustainability outcomes. locating individual
effort (personal or organisational) as a valued contribution to
the shared challenge of achieving a sustainable way of life.
4.2.3 The learner-focused approach does
not deny that there are some basic skills and knowledge that everyone
should know. For example, if some GCSE level knowledge about the
universal scientific laws that govern the biological and human
technological world were sufficiently understood (ie the principle,
not necessarily the scientific formulae) then perhaps there would
be a more scientifically (and therefore economically, socially
and environmentally) coherent approach to resource productivity
and reducing waste and pollution.
4.2.4 Taking a positive, solutions-oriented
approach moves away from the traditional view of ESD as heavy
with ideology and content (environmental education, social responsibility,
development education) and opens it up to an outcome driven approach,
where tools and techniques for maintaining consistency with sustainability
can stimulate innovation. This links sustainability learning to
the DTI approach to resource productivity, and to the RDA, HE,
FE and other regional approaches to economic development. What
do people need to know to deliver sustainability outcomes where
they are?
4.2.5 Too often people don't engage because
they feel sustainable development to be too complex, too expensive
and too huge to contemplate, that whatever they do will make no
difference. Government has a major role to play in turning that
feeling round, so people feel confident (and competent) that their
contribution is going in the right direction, is valued, and counts
towards an improving performance of the UK as a whole.
4.2.6 There is evidence too that people
are searching for a renewed feeling of shared values and a common
purpose. What more positive and uniting challenge could there
be?
4.2.7 In our view, no new infrastructure
should be needed, beyond a trusted, authoritative (ie competent
in sustainability literacy as well as in strategic planning etc.)
and well resourced leadership team, located in the DfES if it
can be given adequate authority and powers, otherwise in the Cabinet
Office. What this team will be doing is driving through what is
essentially a change management programme. All the principles,
tools and common sense that implies exist already. Building the
capacity and confidence of those currently in key leadership and
policy roles will be an obvious first step, including those with
influence on the design, procurement, accreditation, and evaluation
of learning programmes of all types.
4.2.8 Otherwise the mechanisms are more
or less in place. Sustainable development is in the school curriculum,
is an objective of the Learning and Skills Council. The January
White Paper on the Future of Higher Education does not address
it, but that could be changed. It may not be possible to impose
a definition of graduateness that includes sufficient sustainability
knowledge and understanding on universities and colleges, but
expectations can be made clear, as they have in the case of expanding
access. QAA and QCA, as with professional bodies, can make evidence
of sustainability literacy a prerequisite for qualifications,
and a focus of quality control. Making sustainability-related
`competency' seen as a key basic and transferable skill does not
require new institutions, just the positioning of it as such in
the language and practice of everyone, from Ministers to Sector
Skills Councils.
4.2.9 Two key pieces of work need to be
done:
4.2.9.1 without disappearing once more into
the fog of ESD definitions, sustainability "literacy",
and "competency" need to be given meaning in terms of
a sufficiency of knowledge and skills. This can build on the experience
of Forum for the Future, but should build on the work of others
too. (see end of Q4)
4.2.9.2 deeper research needs to be done
to understand better the communication gap between demanders of
learning (pupils, students, and those that employ them) and the
suppliers. For example, and again in our experience, many employers
say they want to employ sustainability "literate" graduates,
but their human resource departments don't know how to ask for
it in the recruitment process. Also, the majority of school leavers
(about 85%) do care about the environment (ref: Gillian Shepherd,
then Secretary of State for Education in the follow up to the
Toyne Report, published 1996, and see also David Hicks, Lessons
for the Future, 2002, RoutledgeFalmer, London and New York). But
generally, students choose between courses on offer, not "expecting"
sustainability or environment to be a feature if it is not in
the title or a specialist option. Even with a modular approach,
students have limited scope to mould their courses to their future
employment preferences. One example where they can is the Engineering
Doctorate of the Centre for Environmental Strategy at Surrey University.
In a final example, suppliers are usually constrained in their
provision by the capacity of the staff they employ. In a small
survey by Forum for the Future, this was found to be a key element
preventing business schools incorporating more sustainable development
into courses. In 2002 World business Council for Sustainable Development
surveyed 20 leading companies and found learning and training
for the environment by and large in place, but very little on
sustainable development.
4.3 Are existing awareness raising Government
campaigns such as "Are you doing your bit" effective
and well targeted? Have past campaigns been evaluated? How could
they be in future?
4.3.1 The "Are you doing your bit"
campaign established a strong "brand" for itself. Its
fatal flaw was to forget the most important feature of any learning
or change programme—that of reinforcing positive behaviour.
Anyone who did their bit (eg cycle to the supermarket with own
shopping bags) did so with no recognition, never mind reward,
and were surrounded by people not doing their bit (eg driving
in a car and using plastic bags) and finding life a lot easier!
4.3.2 A huge opportunity was lost with the
Going for Green element of government strategy. It, and the Are
you doing your bit' campaign did not move out of the exhortatory
approach to changing behaviour, and ignored the basic principles
behind building confidence and competencies of people to work
out for themselves how do things differently. These include commanding
trust in government delivering appropriate policy frameworks and
respect for its sensitivities to the everyday context of people's
lives. (for more, see Susan Owens, 2002, Envt and Planning A,
32(7))
4.3.3 We do not know of a proper evaluation
of the AYDYB campaign so far. Before the major departmental changes
that led to the now Department of Environment and Rural Affairs,
we were in discussion with the department on methods for building
on the strong communication brand recognition of AYDYB. The proposal
was to build on this and design a proper change programme on the
back of it. Using the learn-act-recognise-reinforce cycle, the
programme would use IT systems already in place (eg in schools,
supermarkets), be regionally based but with the capacity to extrapolate
national aggregates and capture good stories. The Forum Directory
of Sustainability in Practice was proposed as a framework to ensure
overall consistency with sustainability, while enabling a wide
variety of "contributions" to be logged, shared and
celebrated. Not to mention be a source of statistics and examples
for the annual government report on its progress on sustainable
development.
4.3.4 Yes, future campaigns (or ideally
properly designed change programmes!) should be evaluated. By
defining outcomes and building in evaluation techniques from the
start, changed behaviour can be assessed. We support and have
trialled the use of innovative evaluation techniques, including
peer and personal appraisal.
4.4 Are there existing education programmes
related to sustainable development which might be considered good
practice? These might include in-house training schemes for ESD
for employees and stakeholders within businesses, the civil service
and other organisations. Are there elements of successful, strategic
communication programmes in other areas which could be applied
to ESD? For example, from other Government awareness campaigns
such as those for drink driving, AIDS and smoking.
4.4.1 We take this question in two parts.
Although learning programmes and communication programmes should
have much in common, this is not always the case. Without going
into a great deal of detail, and very broadly speaking, good communication
requires a message to be heard and understood in order to persuade
people to do something (stop smoking, buy this perfume). It may
also lead to changed behaviour, but not always. Smokers start
again, people change perfumes.
4.4.2 There is much to be learnt from good
marketing and communication techniques, but learning programmes
with the goal of achieving transformative (ie enduring) change
have a significant difference. They are about persuasion, but
more importantly they are about building up in people the sort
of understanding, knowledge and skills that means the changed
behaviour is second nature—part of their everyday routine
rather than exceptional. There are parallels with programmes like
Alcoholics Anonymous. They not only help people stop drinking
alcohol—but also provide on going support and techniques
for staying stopped over the long term and in difficult and changing
circumstances. For smoking and AIDS campaigns—the challenge
is similar—to stay off cigarettes and to practice safe sex
even under pressure, but campaigns do not always reflect this.
4.4.3 Any national learning programmes for
sustainable development is therefore in for the long haul. Ideally
it should be designed on change management lines and last many
years, rather than be a one or two year projects or campaign.
It should include provision for continuous support in terms of
sources of advice, tools, techniques and other materials as well
as evidence that government departments and others are taking
a consistent and coherent approach to make actions and decisions
that favour sustainability easier and cheaper for everyone. Good
performance—by individuals in their neighbourhoods and by
major organisations like the LSC should be recognised and reinforced—making
the learning of why and how it worked widely available.
4.4.4 None of that will happen, except by
chance, without a significant intervention by government to set
the framework and minimum standards for outcomes for any programme
"badged" as offering sustainability competency and literacy.
This will ensure consistency overall, but also encourage innovative
approaches to delivery—at all levels and in types of location.
Standard setting will also be essential if there is to be a shift
away from often ideologically inspired, content heavy and solution
light offerings. These may raise awareness, but also cause worry
and feelings of personal responsibility if they do not at the
same time equip people with the capacity to act and chose differently.
Too much information can dis-empower and alienate. (ref: Susan
Owen, ibid)
4.4.5 Some good things happening
4.4.5.1 NB Individual initiatives are not
a substitute for a nationally driven programme that can be trusted
for its quality. For example, in 2001, there were 24 courses in
the "subject line" of sustainability in UCAS, in 2003
it rose to 68. Many courses, however, are actually concerned with
the environment only and do not address the need for environmental,
social and economic concerns to be addressed together.
Advanced Diploma in Sustainability for mid-career
and fast track managers, Cambridge Programme for Industry (with
Forum for the Future).
BA Sustainable Development, University of Wales,
Bangor.
Ensuring our common future, multi-disciplinary
undergraduate module, University of St Andrews.
Engineering Doctorate, Centre for Environmental
Strategy, Surrey University.
Foundation Course for professionals, PP4SD (with
The Natural Step).
Leadership for Sustainable Development masters,
Forum for the Future.
Learning and Skills Council (via Learning and
Skills Development Agency) mini-projects on sustainable development,
to be published end 2003.
Professors of Sustainable Development Engineering
have been appointed at Imperial College and Cambridge University.
Regions with commitment to sustainability education:
Yorkshire and Humberside, South West, East Midlands, North West.
Staff training programme for support staff,
University of Cambridge (with Forum for the Future).
Sustainable Development for All, University
for Industry.
SustainIT, staff training programme for BAA,
Surrey Council Council and HM Customs and Excise (with Forum for
the Future).
The Learning Curve: developing skills and knowledge
for neighbourhood renewal, ODPM, October 2002 is a good example
of how learning strategies should be scoped and designed.
ww.lifeworth.com, recruiting website for sustainable
development job opportunities.
February 2003
| 
