Abstract
Abstract
While the general public ethic upholds the notions of equality for all, protection from harm both natural and human-generated, and impartiality in the application of law, the ethic breaks down for many communities of color and poverty. Environmental injustice can be found in both urban and rural areas and is too often considered as simply part of the landscape. It was reasoned that this is in part due to a lack of knowledge about the issues of environmental justice within the general public. It was also reasoned that the American educational system, in particular higher education, is the most logical transmission venue for such information. This article reports the findings of an extensive literature review looking at if and how topics of environmental justice are being included in the curriculum and classrooms of higher education.
Introduction
A
Methods
Because the issues inherent in the field of environmental justice are broad, multifaceted, and interdisciplinary, it was important to mirror these attributes within the literature review as well. The primary search terms were environmental justice and higher education and were combined in various ways with other similar or ideologically related terms. The most common of these related terms involve aspects of social justice and to a lesser degree, ethics. Thus, while the terms social justice and environmental justice may be used in slightly different contexts and ways by different authors, it was assumed in the findings of this literature review that they each have as their general aim primarily the same goal, and that they can be considered interchangeable. Additionally, the chosen focus—the intersection of environmental justice and higher education—offered further opportunities while it also imposed limitations. To better interpret the literature, three general strands of inquiry were chosen: 1) the general perception of environmental justice as important or unimportant within the sociopolitical framework; 2) what educators are specifically saying concerning the importance or unimportance of environmental justice and/or its inclusion in the classroom/higher education classroom; and 3) if and how topics of environmental justice are being incorporated into higher education curriculum and class discussions. To address these strands effectively, the general search terms were broadened to include environmental justice/injustice, environmental racism, environmental ethics, education, higher education, curriculum, social justice, and ecojustice. To allow a wide spectrum of definition, nuance, and interpretation, search terms were not assigned formal or “accepted” definitions and were intentionally left imprecise. Additionally, specific disciplines which the literature indicated may include environmental justice within their curriculum were also included in the search terms.
What the Literature Reveals
The literature falls quite neatly, although not perfectly, into the three strands delineated above. Each will be summarized and discussed separately.
In this review of the literature, what is the overall attitude toward environmental justice?
Because the term “environmental justice” as used in this literature review was not given specific parameters by the researcher, a broad set of voices were invited into the conversation concerning environmental justice, its general importance, and its inclusion within the classroom. Definitions varied or were simply not given as authors situated their own meanings and foci. As an example of these variations, Adamson et al. (2002) focus on an unequal distribution of wealth and power within geographic areas that “often leads to social upheaval and the unequal distribution of environmental degradation and/or toxicity” (5), whereas Bryant (1995) chooses to delineate what environmental justice might look like by saying that it consists of the “cultural norms and values, rules, regulations, behaviors, policies, and decisions to support sustainable communities, where people can interact with confidence that their environment is safe, nurturing, and productive” (6).
Overall, the literature shows a decidedly favorable attitude toward environmental justice. No specifically negative positions were encountered. This ambient climate of favor toward environmental justice seems to have its origins in Executive Order No. 12898 with a number of authors referencing this document directly or indirectly. That is, this document appears to have impelled thought and action toward environmental justice on a national basis rather than a local or regional basis by expressing the importance of environmental justice within the sociopolitical life of the nation.
Setting the national standard
While the struggle for environmental justice was well under way by 1994, Executive Order No. 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (Federal Register 1994), voiced at a national and political level the importance of and support for the creation and enforcement of environmental justice within all departments of the federal government. This action has served as a sort of initial benchmark for the notion stating that environmental justice is a national goal. Impelled by this document, and further affirming the importance of environmental justice issues in education, the United States Department of Education's Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice drafted a set of guidelines aimed at addressing environmental and human health issues that work to negatively impact students in minority and low-income populations.
What is the overall view of educators concerning the inclusion of environmental justice in the K–12 /higher education classroom?
Classroom educators at all levels are directly in touch with the knowledge, attitudes, and understanding with which their students enter their teaching environments. Additionally, classroom educators often act as key gatekeepers for the inclusion or exclusion of particular aspects of information within the curriculum. Thus, the experiences and the ways in which these educators perceive the importance or lack of importance of the construct of environmental justice is not to be ignored.
The educators speak about importance
Bell (2004) has argued that in order to gain control of our future and the choices that future will hold, it is necessary that the education of its future citizens—our children and young adults—must include a curriculum aimed at fashioning a livable and just world. In this same vein, Nweke et al. (2011) insist that future policymakers must be exposed to an education that will provide them with what they call “actionable data” concerning inequalities in the field of environmental health, a component of an environmentally just social system. Perhaps two of the most pressing reasons to include issues of environmental justice in the curriculum are expressed by Renner (2004) who observes first, that many students at all levels of education, know and understand very little about the oppression that poverty and racism are capable of generating, and second, that our sociopolitical/industrial worldview prioritizes productivity and profit over the well-being of the environment and the persons living in that environment (i.e., environmental justice). Brickhouse and Kittleson (2006) further contend that such an “unfettered marketplace and insatiable consumerism” (192) are destructive of, as Renner has noted, the environment, but also to the ways in which humans relate to one another and the ways in which curriculum is created and used within the educational system. In other words, Brickhouse and Kittleson can be seen to concur with the ideas of Bowers (1996, 2002, 2009) and Lowenstein et al. (2010) that suggest that the curriculum serves as a replicator of the culture—for good and for bad. But Anazagasty-Rodriquez (2006) concludes that including environmental justice education in the classroom can be seen as an antidote to the issues which Renner and Brickhouse and Kittleson have identified above, calling this inclusion “valuable” for “repealing, challenging and demystifying the capitalist production of nature and its apparatus of value coding concerning nature” (103). In summary, the work of these authors as well as others points strongly to the notion that environmental justice is considered to be an important topic, that it should be a prominent component within curriculum and that it is needed to counter the unwritten curriculum of a society that prizes production and profit over the environment and over people. Bluntly and to the point, as Peloso (2008) has said, “[e]nvironmental justice is an important component of social justice education [and] there is a need to include environmental justice education in all schools” (Slide 2) [my emphasis].
Are topics of environmental justice finding their way into higher education?
Although the focus of this literature review is the intersection of environmental justice and the curriculum of higher education, it should be apparent from the previous sections that most authors are not focusing on higher education and that the primary rhetoric emphasizes the tenets of environmental justice and/or the inclusion of environmental justice in education in a general way. More information exists concerning inclusion in the K–12 grades than at the college and university level, perhaps because it is this age of student for whom place-based education and environmental education—both considered the primary loci of environmental justice education in the K–12 grades—are considered suitable. This section will document instances of inclusion in both the K–12 grades and in higher education as well as framing some of the roadblocks to inclusion.
Venues of Inclusion: Goals and Roadblocks
Environmental education
The literature advocates for and documents the inclusion of environmental justice (or principles closely related to environmental justice) within the broader venue of environmental education, a predominantly, although not exclusively, K–12 venue (Kushmerick et al. 2007). As an example, Cole (2007) writes that “[e]nvironmental education has always included a subtext of socio-cultural issues” (36). Likewise, Stapp (1969) connects environmental education with the development of citizen identity and ethical student behavior. The Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (n.d.) asserts that environmental education has the capacity to promote civic engagement skills and an understanding of the interconnectedness among economic, social, and environmental systems and concerns. This agency further points out that this type of education works to build citizens ready and capable of taking on the challenges that new threats to the environment pose. Likewise they note that environmental education has the capacity to give citizens the skills needed to advocate for the equity of persons living in that environment (i.e., environmental justice). Kwong (1997) takes the environmental justice goals within environmental education to a deeper moral level in asserting that one of environmental education's tasks must be to help students move beyond the ability to simply identify environmental rights and wrongs and toward the ability to understand these rights and wrongs in relationship to why and how they are right or wrong.
While environmental education is structured in ways that should permit it to include themes and topics of environmental justice, the literature reveals a number of roadblocks which hamper its inclusion and implementation. Locke (2009) makes a somewhat sweeping condemnation of the field of environmental education in asserting that while environmental education is interdisciplinary and capable of encompassing environmental justice within its curriculum, it routinely fails to do so. This is because, Locke contends, it too often misses important opportunities to highlight the connections between the imbalances of equity, power and resource depletion, and environmental pollution. Perhaps this failure can be accounted for by considering the criticism which McLaren and Houston (2004) make concerning education in general. They charge that “the field of critical pedagogy is bereft of a conscious ecological dimension [and that] critical educators in the industrialized West have failed to address environmental issues in their work” (28), thus implying a fatal flaw within the educational system itself that is capable of negatively impacting the presentation of environmental justice within the classroom. Alternately, it may be that the placement of environmental justice within environmental education, commonly under the umbrella curriculum of science, works to diminish the inclusion and impact of environmental justice education within environmental education. According to Hoody (1995), environmental education is routinely positioned as an add-on to the science curriculum, thus placing environmental justice in a doubly embedded position within that curriculum. McKeown-Ice and Dendiger (2000) argue that by placing environmental education within an educational framework of science, the focus becomes one of scientific measurement and research rather than one focused on social and environmental justice, disciplines which do not lend themselves well to strict quantification. Nussbaum (2013b) argues similarly in saying that science has an “almost exclusive focus on the science of the environment rather than the ways in which the environment is interconnected and dependent on multiple facets of the sociopolitical aspects of a community” (41). But, the focus of environmental justice is interdisciplinary. It works to knit and bind together the many connections that exist between the disciplines of sociology, nature, health, history, cultural studies, theology, philosophy, literature, and curriculum studies with the discipline of science (Rudy and Konefal 2007). Thus, it can be seen that its aims and the aims of science can indeed be counter to one another. Indeed, Cole (2007) insists that it is dangerous to build a body of academic knowledge based solely on science without considering how that knowledge is connected to the culture, to power, and to inequality.
In spite of the shortcomings and potential flaws which the literature has identified concerning the inclusion of environmental justice within environmental education, only one set of authors was found that directly tackles the tangle of both placement and focus issues identified above. Brickhouse and Kittleson (2006) give credence to the potential flaws within science that may work to exclude meaningful discussion of environmental justice within environmental education. However, they also argue that to fully abandon that science as it connects or fails to connect to environmental justice is counterproductive. Their solution involves using the strengths which the field of science possesses to solve problems both of the environment and of environmental justice. Finally, Peloso (2008) moves past the apparent limitations of science as she notes that “educators [play] a unique role [in] instilling a sense of environmental justice in their students” (Slide 11) and she urges educators to present environmental justice not only as a part of the scientific literacy, but also across the entire curriculum.
Higher education
Overall, the literature connecting environmental justice and higher education was found to be very sparse and not always field-specific. Prior to conducting this literature review it was assumed that in particular, the disciplines of environmental science and environmental studies would yield instances of inclusion or the voicing of support for the inclusion of environmental justice within the curriculum, with other disciplines such as ethics, religion, and philosophy adding a smaller number. Again, the number of sources found was low and surprisingly not found in the fields which reason suggested. All applicable materials found within the literature that address environmental justice in higher education are summarized below.
Several authors attempted to address assumptions which may hinder inclusion of environmental justice in the higher education classroom. They note that it is often assumed that students participating in higher education are capable of and will act in more autonomous, rational, and thoughtful ways than their younger K–12 peer-learners. Therefore, professors/lecturers may mistakenly believe that through the design and implementation of their courses and the construction of their assignments, students will infer the elements of principled practice and social justice inherent, but unspoken in their courses (Reynolds and Brown 2010). According to Viggiani et al. (2005), these beliefs work to suppress the ability of students to both understand and empathize with the “other” in places and situations different from their own. To remedy this disconnection between intent and assimilation these authors suggest using creative and engaging ways to infuse understanding and empathy for the “other” into the content and theory of the course.
A call for educational reform within curriculum and instruction that connects disciplines is heard from two authors (Frank 2002; Gregorian 2004). Clarifying this, Senge (1994) emphasizes the educational appropriateness of considering all curricula as interconnected and urges focusing on the whole rather than the individual parts, arguing that education so structured has the capacity to create a just environment within all communities. Reinforcing this approach, Brickhouse and Kittleson (2006) suggest that using these techniques empower both those communities able to exercise control over their future as well as communities which are marginalized and unable to do so because of issues connected to race and poverty.
As noted above, few authors addressed inclusion of environmental justice in specific courses or fields. However, several examples were found. Latham et al. focus on the field of engineering, saying that a socially responsible engineer is one who has been academically prepared to adopt and implement a systems approach to solving engineering problems. Such an approach requires the incorporation of economic, regulatory, and political, as well as long and short-term environmental concepts. This consideration of both the social and environmental outcomes of engineering actions implies educating for social justice and environmental justice. Indeed, Latham et al. emphasize the necessity that students of engineering possess a wide and inclusive understanding of modern-day issues. Likewise, they stress the importance of understanding how personal engineering decisions can and do impact the social fabric, both locally and globally. Likewise, Vanasupa et al. (2006) assert that curriculum must go well beyond simply teaching technical skills; it must have as its foundation a framework of social responsibility.
In the discipline of environmental sociology a significant shift has been noted in the curriculum, one that focuses on environmental inequity. For instance, Scarce and Smith (1999) tell us that in 1991 only a few, if any, issues concerning environmental justice could be found within the environmental sociology curriculum. However, in 1999, it was found that the majority of environmental sociology courses had environmental equity components, while some courses were fully focused on these issues. Rudy and Konefal (2007) concur, but also criticize the field of environmental sociology for what they say is a focus on the inequities and the resulting movements which grew out of them rather than the historical development of injustice and the political and social practices and actions that perpetuate them.
Finally, the literature contains some indications that other fields of education are becoming interested in ways in which environmental justice can inform and enrich their own work. Examples include critical geography, a discipline which routinely addresses the ways in which social and political spaces impact persons and neighborhoods of color; environmental education which, as shown previously, frequently connects its goals with those of environmental justice; and the health and welfare fields that express a keen awareness of the ways in which environmental justice impacts their work.
However, as noted previously, the research which was conducted failed to amass a significant amount of literature specifically aimed at addressing the ways in which environmental justice is informing the higher education curriculum or is being embedded within that curriculum. Perhaps as Cole (2007) has argued, it is time for a sea change in the approach which higher education takes toward issues of environmental and social justice. In so arguing she bitingly says “[a]n educator who is unwilling to reflect on practice, restructure pedagogies, reinvent teacher identity, and improve opportunities for student learning is useless in furthering the field of education. In the same way, a stagnant discipline, unwilling to reflect, restructure and reimagine itself will not continue to thrive and evolve in relevant, useful ways” (42).
The Rationale for Environmental Justice Inclusion
This literature review began by noting that anecdotal evidence suggests that there is a dearth of knowledge concerning what the meaning of environmental justice is, who it impacts, and what its origins are. It has been shown that multiple voices have said it is an important topic and that it is important or even imperative that citizens understand it, its impacts, and its origins. However, documentation of its implementation within higher education, the primary focus of this literature review, is mostly absent. The reasons for this are unclear and possibilities will be posed in the discussion section. Yet this finding begs the question of real importance—that is, is environmental justice important enough to be included in the nation's educational curriculum, or does the insistence that environmental justice is important exist purely as a feel-good and politically correct idea? In other words, why is it important to embed issues of environmental justice in education, in particular, higher education?
In looking to the literature to answer these questions, the notion of social responsibility can be seen strongly emerging in the work of a number of authors. The term responsibility in this sense implies duty—a duty prescribed to the present generation. That is, it is their task to create and maintain justice, specifically environmental justice, for all generations to follow. Indeed Bell (2004) argues that a society that considers itself to be just is obliged to promote ethical environmental behavior for all citizens. Reed (in Adamson et al. 2002) suggests that “pretending to isolate the environment from its necessary interrelation with society and culture has severely limited the appeal of environmental thought to the detriment of both the natural and social worlds” (my emphasis) (146). Bell further argues that execution of this obligation to promote ethical environmental behavior for all citizens must not be left to bureaucratic experts or scientists, but rather to educators. This then implies that issues of environmental justice must be present in curriculum and in the classroom. Kushmerick et al. (2007) and Nussbaum (2013a) have both looked at the inclusion of environmental justice in the K–12 classroom, noting that at least some schools are making this a part of their curriculum. In doing so Figueroa (in Adamson et al. 2002) asserts that the “moral imagination” of the student is expanded, and Barry (2001) has stated that “[a] good ‘general’ education cannot be a neutral education” (221) implying that students need to be exposed to, in some cases, controversial and discomforting cultural, economic, and political issues that fashion the society in which they live. Cheng-Levine (in Adamson et al. 2002) pushes this idea even further in saying that education toward environmental justice works to form the political self—a self that will act in political and ethical ways in the future.
How does the support which is voiced in the literature for the inclusion of environmental justice content in the K–12 curriculum (in particular) impact or argue for inclusion within the milieu of higher education? Reynolds and Brown (2010) make a solid case for including environmental justice at every level of education when they explain that in their experience, those preservice teachers who enter the classroom knowledgeable about, and having a desire to tackle social justice issues, are far more likely, when confronted with issues of social justice in the higher education curriculum, to follow through on that desire, than students who have not been so exposed. Here, it is the (apparent) preparation in the K–12 grades toward socially just [environmentally just] thought and action that seems to be the key component to socially just thought and action within the higher education classroom. Reinforcing this information, Reynolds and Brown (2010) note that college and university students routinely rely on the pre-existing belief systems constructed within their earlier education and experience for guidance in choosing to accept or discard information presented in the higher education classroom. Further supporting this idea, Sideris (in Reynolds et al. 2010) and Ross (2009) suggest that students necessarily experience cognitive dissonance when material that is being presented differs from past learning and from what they have come to believe is true, thus implying that early education both in the home and in the K–12 grades facilitates the uptake and adoption of socially or environmentally just attitudes and actions later in life.
Applegate (in Reynolds et al. 2010) further outlines four reasons to give environmental justice a significant place in the curriculum of higher education. First, he argues that teaching environmental justice gives students the opportunity to form judgments about their personal actions as well as the actions of those outside themselves through the use of an informed, analytical, and ethical rubric. Second, Applegate says that understanding the societal dynamic which dictates that those who possess power also hold power over those who do not possess power, is imperative for students. Furthermore, it must be recognized that to be a society which is both just and sustainable, the privileges and rights of some must not come at a cost to others. Third, lifestyle and consumer choices made at the societal and personal levels directly impact the engines of production that in turn generate environmentally unjust conditions. Fourth, even those decisions made at the personal level concerning commitments to social and political involvement work to contribute either positively or negatively to environmental justice.
Reynolds and Brown (2010) reinforce Applegate's reasons for inclusion with an example that involves preservice teachers. In their research, they have found that when no specific reference to the principles of social justice [environmental justice] are made in the classroom and no assessment tasks are assigned directly pertaining to social justice, a majority of students are unable to recognize and voice unfair practices in their own schools. This in turn leaves them incapable of addressing these unfair practices in meaningful ways. In conclusion, these authors suggest that curriculum which incorporates “social justice education” is both critical and instrumental in teacher preparation because it enables students to name and assess social bias within the pedagogical approaches and the curricular materials they may be called upon to use as educators.
Discussion
The findings presented in this literature review indicate that there is a strong and positive sentiment toward social and/or environmental justice within the society and within education. Some authors outline the outcomes which they believe will be attained if environmental justice is included in curriculum and some make more general reference to the importance of the concept. Environmental justice as it pertains to education is not well represented in the literature, although references to its inclusion in the K–12 grades are more plentiful than those for higher education. Overall few examples were found linking the inclusion of environmental justice to a higher education-specific discipline or showing the ways in which it is being included in the curriculum. The greatest number of articles addressing the inclusion of environmental or social justice in the higher education classroom was found within the discipline of teacher preparation. However, inclusion should not be limited to teacher education; students in disciplines across the campus can be expected to be the professionals, politicians, leaders, and parents of the future and it is they who will decide the social and moral direction of the world they live in.
Lack of inclusion or lack of documentation?
The absence of environmental justice-related articles may be due to the actual lack of inclusion within the curriculum with professors focusing primarily on the “traditional” information and mechanics of their subject area. Indeed, it may be that some avoid this content altogether seeing it as racially, socially, and politically charged or unimportant. Whatever the reason, this omission arguably represents a missed opportunity to include vital social and ethical learning in their courses. A different explanation for the paucity of articles focusing on the intersection of environmental justice and education may be that while topics of environmental justice are being included in curriculum, it is simply not being written up for journal publication. The reasons for this could vary. For instance, the nature of the topic does not directly lead to documentation of inclusion because of its interdisciplinary qualities. Or, inclusion in the classroom is spontaneous and related to other content in ways that preclude its inclusion as an intentional part of the formal curriculum. Again, whatever the reasons, this omission represents a loss of scholarly opportunity.
In the future, research needs to be conducted that considers how and when environmental justice content is being included in higher education coursework. That is, it must be asked: In what disciplines and in what contexts is environmental justice being added to the curriculum? What factors promote or exclude its inclusion? What are the long-term outcomes of adding these topics? With answers to these and other questions, educators will have an opportunity to create real and positive change for the future.