Programs designed to promote the use of natural environments for leisure purposes need to be based on a sound and justifiable environmental ethic. This paper attempts to develop such an ethic. The general and basic ecological attitude, arguments relating to the need for human survival, other arguments which relate to human interests such as the need for beauty, recreation and scientific endeavours and utilitarian arguments relating to the needs of future generations are examined and are seen as being morally and practically inadequate.

The only justifiable environmental ethic is seen as one which has. as its central concept, the interdependent natural community in which the interests of all individual members of the community (including the interests of human beings) are regarded as secondary to the good of the total community. In the ethic, humans protect the natural environment because the entities of nature are “fellow-travellers”, members of the same moral community.

In attempting to review the recent progress and outline a few of the remaining problems in environmental education it is important, but also because of the scope of the task extremely difficult, to find a suitable structure that will provide some continuity. I have elected therefore to comment firstly on the fundamental issue of philosophy, of what we mean by environmental education and what we acknowledge as practical examples; secondly to discuss a few prominent issues of teaching and learning in four different spheres of education: primary and secondary schools, higher education (universities and colleges of advanced education), technical and further education (TAFE), and non-formal education; and lastly to comment on two general issues in environmental education that relate to the entire field, the first to participation and the need to identify and make suitable provision for those sections of the community who have as yet had no formal contact with environmental education, and the second to the special problems and teaching demands arising from its characteristic focus on the development of attitudes and values and appropriate behavioural change.

To take firstly the issue of philosophy: it appears that the level of discussion on the nature and objectives of environmental education has advanced considerably in the past decade. The sometimes bitter and generally unproductive arguments of the early 1970s about what was and was not related to environmental education seem now to have largely disappeared, being replaced by a more or less common dialogue about the nature and purpose of environmental education and ways in which it can be further developed. Nevertheless, despite this general and encouraging trend there still exist some significant areas of disagreement and confusion. One example concerns the distinction between environmental education as a movement or collective enterprise and as a description of individual activities or programmes. This distinction is an important one because of different expectations — in the former case that it necessarily reflects an interdisciplinary character and has a clear emphasis on problem-solving and decision-making activities; but this is not to say that a particular programme which fails to reflect these emphases has nothing to contribute to environmental education.

Land degradation through erosion and salinity is Australia's most urgent environmental problem.

Despite the extent and rate of land deterioration, it is not a political issue and has no lobby. Solution to the problem lies in education, incentives and regulations, each in their appropriate role.

Basically Australia needs a fundamental change in attitude toward the land based on land ethics. Fifteen specific concepts are recommended for teaching in schools to encourage a sustainable ecological basis for rural production.

The author challenges environmental educators to recognize and pursue the need for land ethics as the cornerstone of Australia's soil conservation campaign and points out that, without a fundamental change of heart leading to greater respect and humility toward the land, neither laws or finances will reverse the present deteriorating situation on the land.

Australia's arid and semiarid lands comprise about 80% of the continent. The human population of around 300,000 is very low. The dominant land use is the pastoral industry. However, other interacting land uses include national parks, mining and aboriginal lands. Some of the impacts of European people on soils, vegetation and native wildlife, following almost 200 years of settlement are discussed.

Management of arid lands for sustainable long-term yield requires integrated studies into the physical and biological environment. The central issue for the administration and management of arid grazing lands is the accurate estimation of grazing capacity in relation to the wide annual fluctuations in available forage for livestock in arid regions. Any estimate for grazing capacity must be such that wool or meat production is maximal, or near-maximal, and that soil and vegetation stability is maintained over the long-term. The basic ecological components for such an arid grazing land management programme are described. The programme also provides the essential information base on which future decisions on land administration issues can be made by policy makers.

In 1980-81 when I last wrote about the future of environmental education in Australian schools I was quite pessimistic and concluded that environmental education had been a phenomenon of the affluent seventies in Australia. This conclusion was based on observations, reading and experience with schools, education authorities and curriculum projects over the preceding seven years.

Environmental education aims to develop not only awareness, understanding and skills. Most importantly, it also aims to encourage feelings of concern for the environment and protection. This means that it is concerned with social reconstruction — environmental education programs must have moral and political components if they are to achieve the accepted aims of environmental education. In 1980-81 I argued that environmental education had been subjected to incorporation within the existing hegemoney of schools in a neutralised form — the radical ‘action’ components of the environmental education aims had been deleted from school programs whilst the less controversial cognitive and skill aims had been retained, together with the name ‘environmental education’. There was evidence that programs of this genre had increased during the seventies, including an increased environmental content in traditional subjects in the curriculum. In general terms there was little inducement for schools to implement all the aims of environmental education.

At the inaugural national conference of the Australian Association for Environmental Education in Adelaide (October, 1980), it was clear that multiple interpretations existed of the key descriptor ‘environmental education’. At that conference, at earlier international conferences (e.g., Tbilisi, 1977) and in recent Australian curriculum materials (e.g., The Curriculum Development Centre's (CDC's) Environmental Education Project), the terms education about the environment, education in the environment, and education for the environment were and have been used to capture the various interpretations of environmental education. An explication of these terms is offered in the Environmental Education Project (CDC, 1981), and in Fensham (1979).

These terms seems to embrace the various facets to emerge in discourse about environmental education — they can, perhaps, be taken as representing the accepted dimensions of environmental education.

Environmental work deals in the most depressing of statistics — measures of damage to our planet and measures of apparent incapacity to change them. Years working to bring about changes in the way people deal with their environment can be very frustrating and ultimately debilitating. Some aspects of personal frustration and the despair it leads to are examined. The most advanced tools used by environmental scientists such as systems theory are themselves shown to be a source of frustration. A principal source of despair is shown to be frustrated expectations based on faulty world views.

Suggestions toward resolving this outcome of concern are made. They involve personal work toward changing the expectations we have of our tools and the way we deal with reality. Evidence for the efficacy of such suggestions is taken from General System Theory itself. Deep Ecology and interpretations of twentieth century physics.

This is a version of a paper presented at the Second National Conference of the Australian Association for Environmental Education held in Brisbane in August 1982.

This paper will begin with an attempt to address the question: “What presuppositions about teaching and curriculum are embedded in the developed conception of environmental education as education for the environment?” The answers advanced here will be tentative in nature and obviously incomplete. They will, however, allow the discussion to advance to a consideration of teacher behaviours compatible with the education for the environment concept, and to an appreciation of the dilemmas confronting teachers of environmental education so conceived.

The ethical dimensions of environmental study are considered with particular reference to environmental education. It is argued that moral considerations and value judgements are an inevitable component of any form of environmental investigation or education and the nature of environmental ethics is explored in this context. Methods for transmitting environmental ethics are considered critically and the article concludes by suggesting some alternative approaches to exploring environmental ethics in education.

Social and environmental education are two sides of a coin. Each has similar student-centred goals that see an understanding of society or the environment and one's place within it as a medium for achieving some of the long term goals of education. The similarities between the two have not been recognised nearly as much as they could have been, though Disinger (1982) among others has recognized international, global, futures, population and values education (all long established themes in social education) as imperatives in environmental education. Both social and environmental education seek to help young people identify, understand and desire to resolve the problems that confront humanity.

The world is experiencing a number of major problems (overpopulation, too-rapid urbanisation, uncontrolled technology, habitat destruction etc.) which are threatening the future of human life on earth. To document the alleged causes of environmental degradation as such a list of discrete problems as is done by many writers (Palme, 1972; Burnet, 1979 etc.) can lead to an erroneous supposition that provided a systematic solution can be found for each problem, then the future is likely to be less threatened. This supposition is incorrect because the crisis has arisen from the threat posed by the whole, that is, the irrevocable links which exist between each of these problem areas such as those listed above. Resolving one problem satisfactorily on a global scale will not provide solutions for the other problem areas. The solution must lie with an approach which might not only solve many present problems but also prevent new problems from arising. Such a remedy reflects on the ecological nature of the problem, recognising that “everything is connected to everything else” (Commoner, 1972a). From around 1970, this role has been allocated specifically to education. Perelman (1976) saw a need to develop ecological pedagogy, an educational process that is ecological not only in its subject matter but in its structure and dynamics as well. Both Ehrlich (1971) and Commoner (1972b) saw education as a necessary component of any solution. Boyden (1970) argued that educational institutions must be placed at the top of the list of agents whose task is to reverse the trend towards environmental degradation. He noted that a key task for present adult generations is to provide youth with an environmental education (EE) that will prepare them emotionally and intellectually for the role of protecting the biosphere. Stapp (1970, 24) remarked on the need for well-informed educators: “If individuals are to be prepared to make the kind of environmental decisions that our nation will face in the future, schools must embark on a comprehensive program that will span the curriculum (K-12).”

For many schools, environmental education constitutes a curriculum innovation in that it represents a challenge to existing teaching and curriculum practice. An innovation issue frequently neglected in environmental education is the spread of messages about the innovation within and between schools. This neglect is often apparent in the case of environmental education materials developed at sites away from the school. In such cases, great care is taken to develop a useful curriculum resource, and to distribute it from central development site to school classrooms. For example, when the Curriculum Development Centre (CDC) produced its recent environmental education materials, the Environmental Education Project, it sought to disseminate the innovation by fostering sales through such strategies as the mailing of promotional leaflets to all schools, conducting state and national launchings, providing cost-free review copies to subject associations and the like, and advertisements. However, the exchange of ideas about the innovation from practising teacher to practising teacher is more difficult to organise from outside the school.