House of Commons - Environmental Audit

Select Committee on Environmental Audit Tenth Report

SETTING A FRAMEWORK FOR EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

12. The UK Sustainable Development Strategy states that to meet the challenges of sustainable development society needs "a skilled and adaptable labour force and a flexible labour market" and that "public involvement is essential for a truly sustainable community".[15]

13. The latest annual review of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy recognises the particular contribution of education in promoting the strategy's aims:

14. These statements, however positive, fall short of providing a guiding vision for Government departments to work to.

15. Learning is a key driver for sustainable change. However, the UK Strategy for Sustainable Development does not set out a clear vision of the contribution which learning can make to achieving the Government's sustainable development goals. We recommend that the Government rectifies this omission during the forthcoming review of the strategy.

Developing a strategic approach

16. ESD needs to be co-ordinated across Government Departments and within other agencies as it is relevant to and contributes to a number of other policy goals relating to urban regeneration, social cohesion and citizenship. ESD is also fundamental to achieving a number of Government strategies including the Biodiversity Strategy,[17] the Climate Change Programme,[18] and national and regional waste strategies.

THE GOVERNMENT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION PANEL

17. In 1995 the then Secretaries of State for Education and Employment and the Environment hosted a conference on environmental education from which emerged an idea to run a series of conferences on ESD policy development. It was later decided that a panel would be more effective and the intention to establish one was announced in "The Government's Strategy for Environmental Education in England and Wales", a leaflet produced by the Department for Education and Employment (now DfES) and the Department for the Environment (now DEFRA).[19]

18. The Government SDEP was established in February 1998 for a five year period. It was co-sponsored by, and reported directly to, DEFRA and DfES Ministers. Its aim was to consider ESD in its broadest sense to make practical recommendations for action in England.[20] It was disbanded on 1 March 2003 after its quinquennial review which recommended that DfES and DEFRA took forward ESD with an alternative stakeholder process (discussed further in paras 35-44). [21]

19. The review recognised that the Panel had raised the profile of ESD and had produced a "rich, diverse and widely welcomed suite of proposals and recommendations".[22] However, the review also noted that there was some evidence that Government departments, associated agencies and external bodies, beyond the sponsor departments, had been less prepared to take forward SDEP's recommendations (DCMS being a notable exception).

20. The Development Education Association (DEA) suggests that the Panel's work "did not have champions of sufficient seniority and influence within education".[23] In addition, although a joint DfES/DEFRA secretariat supported the Panel, in practice DEFRA took the lead. Panel members have praised the quality of DEFRA's support but noted that this contributed to the impression that ESD was primarily about environmental issues and not a priority for education.[24]

21. During its existence, the SDEP delivered 60 recommendations in 25 publications. Over 70% of these recommendations have been partially or wholly achieved and the actions taken are summarised in the Panel's final annual report.[25] The Panel influenced and engaged a broad range of sectors during its appointment but highlighted informal learning and ESD in the workplace as key areas for further work.[26]

22. We have not sought to duplicate the work of the Panel or rehearse their arguments but have used their work as a platform for further action and analysis. We have drawn largely on their thoughtful and focussed reports and sought to highlight outstanding areas for further action.

23. We commend the Sustainable Development Education Panel for its achievements over its five year appointment. It is essential that the DfES builds upon the Panel's work to ensure that the momentum is not squandered.

THE ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS

24. DfES is the lead department for ESD. It also has an important role in establishing a workforce equipped with the skills to enable employers to meet the challenges that sustainable development presents. Both these aspects of the Department's responsibilities have been acknowledged by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills.[27] He told us that if DfES did not lead on ESD it would "not really happen".[28]

25. In practice, DfES has yet to convey any sense that it sees ESD as in integral part of its core functions or that it has recognised the potential which ESD offers for innovative learning opportunities. The department has been widely criticised for failing to provide leadership on ESD.[29] Despite its co-sponsorship of the SDEP, the Panel has not been mentioned in any of the last three DfES departmental reports and all the Panel's publications over the last five years have been hosted on DEFRA's website.

26. There has been a range of initiatives and pilot projects relating to ESD in areas for which the DfES has responsibility. For example, the curriculum, promoting the outdoor classroom (Growing Schools), and post-16 learning.[30] These examples however do not appear to be the result of a coherent or co-ordinated attempt by the department to provide a strategic framework for ESD across the educational spectrum. Instead, it appears to have favoured short-term, 'quick-fix' measures.[31]

27. There is a significant level of activity on ESD taking place across other Government departments (eg DEFRA, DCMS and DfID), statutory agencies (eg English Nature, the Countryside Agency, the Environment Agency), local and regional government[32] and national and local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), The Groundwork Trust, WWF and Global Action Plan (GAP). Trade associations, trade unions and professions have also been exploring the opportunities for ESD.

28. The absence of strategic leadership limits the effectiveness and efficiency of these initiatives and prevents them developing into a coherent programme. As the RSPB argued, there is "substantial evidence of gaps in provision, and overlap and duplication in delivery".[33] The Geographical Association (GA), suggests that this is often because teachers, local government officers, NGOs, employers etc have lacked the understanding and/or the infrastructural support to realise such integration.[34] The GA feels that the lack of a strategic framework has led to the development of parallel, unconnected life-long learning and sustainable development initiatives in some local authorities. There is also uncertainty within schools and NGOs regarding funding mechanisms and funding priorities between environmental education, development education, sustainable development and inclusion.[35]

29. We are concerned that the Secretary of State's responses to our specific questions on ESD were consistently framed around operational, 'greening government' issues, such as school transport and estates management, rather than educational policy. It is important that the DfES' response to sustainable development is evident in both its educational policies and its operations, not least because the approaching UN decade on ESD will bring added pressure on Governments to deliver on both fronts.

30. Jonathon Porritt, the Chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission, told us that he thought that DfES had rather "struggled" with the concept of sustainable development in general. He added:

31. Commendably, the Secretary of State, Rt hon. Charles Clarke MP, reacted quickly to these comments and called a meeting with Mr Porritt to discuss where the Department's weaknesses lay and how the Department might address them.[37] He subsequently accepted the charge that the Department as a whole was not demonstrating sufficient commitment to sustainable development.[38] He felt that the Department could helpfully review the areas where it had direct control such as 'house keeping' and school transport and then turn its attention to those areas such as the curriculum where it was only "tangentially responsible". To its credit, the Department has recently established a sustainable development section on its website which sets DfES' policies and initiatives in the context of the UK Strategy for Sustainable Development.[39]

32. We welcome the Secretary of State for Education and Skills' statement confirming the DfES as the lead department for delivering and promoting ESD.

33. The DfES has failed to demonstrate any clear vision or strategic thinking relating to ESD. We have been struck by how much has been achieved, despite this policy vacuum, by a range of committed organisations and individual "champions", acting on their own initiative, across the spectrum of lifelong learning. This wealth of activity has flourished despite, rather than because of, DfES.

34. The enthusiasm and body of expertise which already exists within the field of ESD would now benefit from an overall strategic framework. We recommend that DfES develops such a framework which puts ESD firmly within the core education agenda, provides direction and impetus to existing initiatives, identifies and builds upon existing good practice, and prevents any unnecessary duplication of effort and resources.

A STRATEGY FOR ESD

35. At the request of Ministers, the final act of the SDEP was to deliver a draft strategy for ESD in England. The Department reluctantly made this document public, following pressure from both the SDEP and ourselves.[40]

36. In March, we were told that the draft strategy would form the basis for an action plan, after it had been redrafted by a 'Sounding Board' formed from relevant sectors and a Whitehall Steering Group.[41] The action plan would then be subject to a full consultation in the summer.

37. The Sounding Board met for the first time on 30 June 2003 to discuss "emerging thinking" on an action plan for England relating to Sustainable Development in Education and Skills.[42] DfES describes this plan as containing "many actions that reflect" the SDEP's recommendations.[43] This is clearly more than just a redrafting of the Panel's draft strategy. Indeed, the Secretary of State has decided that the plan should address both DfES' environmental management responsibilities (eg estate management and operations) and ESD policy.

38. The draft action plan was placed on the DfES' website on 7 July 2003, inviting comments by 18 July 2003 allowing less than two weeks with no indication of whether this was the only opportunity to offer views or an initial phase of consultation. Cabinet Office guidelines specify twelve weeks as the standard minimum period for a consultation and advise that consultation documents should "describe any earlier, parallel and planned later consultation".[44]

39. The 'Sounding Board' is scheduled to meet again in September to make final revisions in the light of the consultation responses.

40. We are astonished that DfES has the audacity to offer less than two weeks for comment on its draft action plan for sustainable development. This is not the "full consultation" that was promised, nor is it in line with Cabinet Office guidelines on consultation. The truncated consultation denies key stakeholders the opportunity to contribute fully to the development of the action plan and will effectively prevent the Department from benefiting from the experience and expertise which already exists.

41. We recommend that DfES launches a full twelve week consultation on its action plan in line with Cabinet Guidelines, after the next Sounding Board meeting in September 2003.

42. There is widespread demand for an overarching strategy for ESD within the educational sector and from those promoting sustainable development more generally.

43. We support the development of a stand alone strategy for ESD which builds upon the draft presented by the SDEP and is subject to public consultation.

44. We are concerned that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills has chosen to incorporate the Panel's ESD strategy into one action plan which sets out measures for the delivery of objectives relating to both environmental management and ESD policy. We recognise the importance of reflecting sustainable development principles in both departmental operations and policy but we believe that this approach is inherently risky: the Department will need to take particular care to ensure that ESD in educational policy receive the profile it deserves.

IMPLEMENTATION

45. The main centre of ESD activity within the Department has traditionally been within the geography section of the curriculum division. This allocation of responsibility has not facilitated a strategic approach to ESD across all aspects of lifelong learning. We are therefore pleased to note that the action plan is being dealt with at a corporate level within DfES.[45] Even so, the draft action plan gives little indication of the funding or infrastructure that will be provided for implementation and evaluation.

46. The implementation of the action plan will require a co-ordinated response across DfES' delivery partners. The Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted), the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and the Teacher Training Agency (TTA) in particular have vital roles to play in enabling and reviewing change. All of these bodies, except the TTA, have been included in the membership of the Sounding Board which has been convened to comment on the development of the action plan. We are surprised that the TTA has been omitted from the membership of the Sounding Board which is developing the DfES action plan on sustainable development. We recommend that DfES extents membership to include this key stakeholder.

47. The DfES has yet to confirm the existence of the Sounding Board beyond the development of the action plan. Effective implementation of the plan will be dependent upon the continued engagement with stakeholders. If the Sounding Board is to be discontinued we recommend DfES put in place an alternative mechanism for stakeholder involvement.

48. Many aspects of DfES' education agenda are delivered through other agencies. These organisations need a clear strategic steer from DfES to enable them to play their full part in ESD. The quinquennial review for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority took place last year but did not result in any change to its remit which dates from 1997 and does not include any specific requirement relating to sustainable development. However, the Department is currently finalising a memorandum of understanding with the QCA[46] who maintain that a lack of remit has not stopped them acknowledging sustainable development as significant.[47] We believe that it is important that responsibilities for ESD are clearly defined and that DfES sets sustainable development firmly within the remits of all its delivery partners, as has already been done for the LSC.

49. We recommend that DfES incorporates appropriate responsibilities for ESD within the remit of each of its Non-Departmental Public Bodies. This should become a matter of routine when new agencies and delivery partners are established.

50. A range of NGOs have established ESD initiatives, many of which have received funding through either DEFRA's Environmental Action Fund or through the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme. DEFRA has traditionally led Government support for ESD within the NGO sector.[48] However, the RSPB suggests that the Environmental Action Fund should now operate under the umbrella of the DfES strategy for ESD and that its ESD components should be managed by DfES.[49]

51. In exerting a leadership role on ESD, DfES will need to be sensitive to DEFRA's legitimate role in promoting sustainable development and co-ordinate its efforts closely. It will also need to consider the implications of the withdrawal of the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme for those NGOs on whom it might rely to effect change.

52. We do not believe that a strategic approach to ESD would necessarily require significant new resources. It can be achieved by realigning current priorities to integrate ESD into existing work. We recommend that the DfES reviews its current range of ESD initiatives and seeks to rationalise them into a more cohesive programme, concentrating on those approaches which have delivered results.

LEADING BY EXAMPLE

53. Capital investment in schools has increased significantly in recent years. In 1996-97 it was £683 million and is now running at some £3 billion for 2002-03 and is due to rise to an annual rate of over £5 billion by 2005-06. David Milliband MP, Schools Standards Minister recently announced the DfES' building plans for providing 21^st Century school facilities for every secondary pupil in the next 10-15 years as part of its Building Schools for the Future initiative.[50] This extensive programme of building and refurbishment provides an opportunity to incorporate sustainability considerations.

54. The consideration of sustainability in design is consistent with the requirements of the Framework for Sustainable Development on the Government Estate,[51] which applies to all departments, and can also reinforce ESD learning through practical examples.

55. Local Education Authority (LEA) Asset Management Plans include a Suitability Assessment which considers the environmental conditions in schools. The Asset Management Plans appraisal guidance for 2001-2002 sets a number of performance standards relating to sustainability including a requirement to consider "providing sustainable and energy-efficient buildings" that are consistent with the Government's UK strategy for sustainable development.[52]

56. DfES has recognised that "sustainability of building development and construction" is likely to be a significant driver for change in school building design.[53] DfES' Classrooms of the Future initiative aims to challenge the current thinking on school building design. Twelve local authorities are developing pilot projects focusing on the creation of innovative learning environments to inspire children to achieve more. The lessons learned from these pilots will shape new design guidance.

57. DfES has developed a range of guidance on building design in educational establishments. It now needs to take an active role in promoting this guidance and monitoring and evaluating the extent to which it is being adopted.

15 A better quality of life: A strategy for sustainable development for the UK, Cm 4345, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, 1999, paras 6.22 and 7.87. Back

16 Achieving a better quality of life: Review of progress towards sustainable development - Government Annual Report 2002, DEFRA, February 2003, para 2.13. Back

17 Working with the Grain of Nature: a biodiversity strategy for England, DEFRA, October 2002. Back

18 Climate change: The UK Programme, Cm 4913, DETR, November 2000. Back

19 Ev70, para 31. Back

20 The Welsh Assembly Government's Education for Sustainable Development Panel was established in May 2001. See Ev350, para 2. Back

21 A Sustained Lesson - Reviewing England's Sustainable Development Education Panel, DfES/DEFRA/, February 2003, para 88. Back

22 Ibid, para 78. Back

23 Ev198, para 3.0. Back

24 See for example, Ev198, para 3.0. Back

25 Understanding, Conviction and Commitment: The Fifth Annual Report of the Sustainable Development Education Panel, DEFRA, March 2003. Back

26 Ibid, paras 84 and 96. Back