Climate Change Education for Sustainability in Brazil: A Status Report

Abstract

This article maps and explains Brazil’s policies, strategies, plans and initiatives related to Climate Change Education (CCE), in the overall context of Environmental Education (EE) and Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). The case of Brazil offers useful insights on how to enhance climate response through education because of its unique strength in climate policy making and its established EE tradition. The article traces the development of EE in Brazil and provides an overview of the relations between EE and climate change legislations and public policies. Although Brazil established a strong legal framework for EE and the Ministries of the Environment and Education have adopted a number of initiatives to implement the EE policies, climate change legislation addresses education rather superficially. Many other challenges remain, including fully integrating EE in the mainstream work of the Ministry of Education, enhancing the impact of EE policies and programmes, and creating synergies between EE and a number of climate-related education initiatives developed in other areas such as science and technology.

Keywords

ESD environmental education climate change education policy Brazil

INTRODUCTION

Brazil, a federal republic consisting of 26 states and one federal district (Brasília), covers nearly half of South America. Accounting for more than 15 per cent of the plant and animal species and 12 per cent of the available freshwater in the world, Brazil’s ecosystems include not only the rainforest of the Amazon basin which covers about 60 per cent of the country’s territory and constitutes one of the world’s most biodiversity-rich ecosystems but also the diverse biomes such as the savannah-like Cerrado and the wetlands of the Pantanal (European Commission, 2007).

In addition to rich ecosystems which play an important role in the global carbon cycle and maintaining the planetary balance, Brazil stands out for its regional and social diversity and disparities, and can be characterized by countervailing trends: unity and diversity, modernity and tradition, progressive government policies and deeply rooted conservative authoritarianism. In Brazil, which is considered a stabilized democracy with a well-developed political and institutional system, poverty prevails in various favelas (shantytowns) in metropolitan areas and in remote upcountry regions.

Due to its large size, unique geography, distinctive policies and investments in hydropower and biofuels, active involvement in multilateral sustainable development negotiations, and impressive economic growth in recent years, Brazil holds many keys to putting the world on a more sustainable development path, including improving the global governance of climate change. Brazil, along with China, India and South Africa, made its mark on the global climate change negotiations at the 15th session of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP 15) in Copenhagen in 2009 by resisting binding mitigation commitments.

This article aims to map and explain Brazil’s policies, strategies, plans—and to a lesser extent practices—related to CCE, in the overall context of EE and ESD. A policy review of CCE in Brazil can offer useful insights on how to enhance climate response through education because of the unique position Brazil holds in relation to the global governance of climate change. First, Brazil, like China, is now considered to be the ‘vanguard of climate change policy making’, strengthening climate governance within their domestic political arenas, while at the same time broadly maintaining its foreign policies and approaches to global climate governance which have contributed to the deadlock in the UNFCCC negotiations (Held et al., 2012: 9). Second, Brazil is widely considered to be an international leader in EE (UNICEF, 2012). To examine interactions and alignment—or a lack thereof— between climate change policymaking and EE policymaking in Brazil can enhance our understanding of how education—especially holistic EE/ESD approaches can be better positioned in climate change policymaking. The article is based primarily on the review of relevant policy documents and academic literature. In order to fill gaps in data from desk research, a series of informal interviews were also conducted with government officials responsible for CCE-related activities at different ministries. The first part of the article traces the development of EE in Brazil. The second part focuses on how CCE is positioned in climate change policymaking. The article concludes by discussing challenges and the ways forward.

DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN BRAZIL

It is not possible to discuss ESD in Brazil in a meaningful way without taking into consideration the development of EE in the country. In the Brazilian and more broadly Latin American context, EE builds on environmental movements which struggled for democratic freedom under military dictatorship, simultaneously questioning environmental degradation and social inequalities. The United Nations (UN) Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014) has encountered resistance in some parts of the world, partly due to UNESCO’s characterization of ESD as more advanced or holistic than EE (Mochizuki, 2010). It is important to recognize that an observation made by Western European and North American scholars about ‘an evolution from nature conservation to EE to ESD’ (Wals, 2012: 628) is not a universal trajectory of EE but a culturally specific one.

ESD has also been perceived as diluting the critical and transformative approaches of EE by aligning itself too closely with the development agenda, rather than efforts to build sustainable societies (Sorrentino et al., 2005). ESD has been roundly criticized by those who believe that it fosters the economistic and developmental rationality which underpins the current environmental crisis (Jacobi et al., 2011; Ministry of the Environment, 2005: 47; Loureiro and Soares de Lima, 2012). In some Latin American and Portuguese speaking countries and specifically in Brazil, both public policies and academic discourses often employ a critical EE framework which seeks participatory engagement towards human emancipation, making a clear departure from an instrumental view which emphasizes the role of education in changing human behaviour in predetermined directions. One of the examples of such a critical framework is the Treaty on Environmental Education for Sustainable Societies and Global Responsibility (1992), which posits EE as a political act. In this article, EE is used as a concept and term that encompasses ESD, respecting the legacy and enduring relevance of EE which has made significant marks in the Brazilian legislation and policies as well as in civil society.

Policies on Environmental Education

In Brazil, EE has long been explicitly positioned in environmental governance. In 1981, the Brazilian government put into force the National Environmental Policy (Law 6938/81), in which one of the ten principles focuses on EE: ‘environmental education at all levels of education, including community education, intended to enable them to participate actively in environmental protection’. A healthy environment as a citizen’s right also has a place in 1988 Brazilian Constitution, which also established principles that guide national education. Specifically concerning EE, the Constitution (Chap. VI, Article 225) establishes that ‘everyone has the right to an ecologically balanced environment, of common use, and essential to a healthy quality of life, imposing on public power and society the duty to defend and preserve it for present and future generations’, emphasizing the need ‘to promote environmental education in all levels of education and public awareness to preserve the environment’.

In 1999 the National Environmental Education Policy (PNEA) was established by Law 9795/99. According to this law, environmental issues in formal education are presented as an interdisciplinary alternative, as opposed to a specific school discipline. The PNEA and Decree 4281/2002 established the structure, composition and powers of the Governing Body, composed by the Ministries of the Environment and Education, as well as the Advisory Committee, consisting of thirteen representatives of governmental and non-governmental sectors, labourers, employers and environmental educators. Law 9795/99 also encouraged the creation of sub-national Commissions for Environmental Education and Policies, based on the national structure.

In legal terms, the Brazilian Constitution (1988) and the National Policy on the Environment (1981) already provided remarkable leverage for institutionalizing EE in Brazil and secured society the right to universal access to EE. The PNEA (1999) was designed to complement and clarify the principles and guidelines necessary in practice. The PNEA is regulated by two resolutions more recently passed: the National Environment Council (CONAMA) Resolution 422/2010 and the National Education Council (CNE) Resolution 02/2012. The CONAMA Resolution established guidelines for the content and procedures for EE campaigns and actions, stipulating that EE in formal and non-formal education, organized by the public sector, private sector and civil society actors, should adopt principles and values to build sustainable societies. The CNE Resolution focusing on formal education systems was highlighted by the Ministry of Education as the National Curriculum Guidelines for EE during the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in 2012. It establishes that EE should be a continuous and permanent curriculum component for schools and academic activities, with an integrated and cross-curricular approach, in all areas of knowledge. It further proposes a ‘review of fragmented school practices by establishing the relationship between climate change and the current model of production, consumption and social organization, and aiming for the prevention of environmental disasters and the protection of communities’.

Mainstreaming EE/ESD in Education Policy

Whereas in Brazil much has been accomplished in the field of EE not only in terms of policy but also in practice as outlined in the next section, integrating EE into mainstream education policy making is still a challenge. The National Education Plan (PNE) for the 2011–2020 decade (Project Law 8035/2010), approved in June 2014 after a prolonged period of deliberations, does not explicitly mention EE, ESD or CCE. This follows the preceding education plans and policies, which have largely ignored or sidelined EE, at times stopping at including it in a list of cross-curricular themes. The lack of reference to EE in the new PNE is particularly striking, for it establishes guidelines or directives for Education, one of them being ‘promoting social and environmental sustainability’. As Loureiro and Soares de Lima (2012) put it, the EE situation in Brazil is ‘as if there existed a specific environmental education system that sometimes interacts, but doesn’t integrate within the dynamics of the education field at all levels’. The case of Brazil clearly points to the need for—and difficulty of—fully integrating EE into mainstream education policymaking, on the one hand, and integrating holistic approaches to education in sustainability policymaking, on the other, as outlined in the latter half of this article.

EE Programmes in Brazil

Since the beginning of the 1990s, preparatory activities for the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) or the Rio Summit led to the creation of two institutions: the Coordination for Environmental Education at the Ministry of Education (Ministério da Educação: MEC) and an EE Division of the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA). In 1994, the Ministries of the Environment and Education, in partnership with the Presidency of the Republic, launched a centralized National Environmental Education Program (PRONEA) (Ministry of the Environment, 2005). In 1997 they promoted a National Environmental Education Conference in Brasília. Furthermore, MEC drafted the National Curriculum Parameters (PCNs) in 1997 and PCNs in Action—the Environment in 2001, aiming to provide national guidelines for the diversified part of school curricula with a group of themes that crossed disciplinary boundaries: environment, ethics, cultural diversity, sexual orientation, work and consumption.

As a result of a growing interest in EE, as demonstrated partly by the establishment of the PNEA in 1999, the National Institute of Educational Studies and Research (INEP) under MEC included in the annual School Census (between 2001 and 2003) questions about the presence of EE in primary schools in Brazil. The Census found that in 2001, 61.2 per cent of elementary schools reported working with EE and, in 2004, this percentage rose to 94 per cent (Veiga et al., 2005). These figures show that EE is almost universalized in the primary education system.

To better understand school-based EE practices, a research project involving five federal universities, 12 states and 418 schools was conducted. This project entitled ‘What are they doing—the schools that say they do EE?’ found significant gaps between EE practices in schools and academic and public policy discourses on the ideals of critical EE (Trajber and Ramos Mendonça, 2006). The EE practices reported by schools tended to treat themes such as waste, water, and air in a superficial manner and many focused on awareness-raising activities unrelated to the curriculum. These limitations reflect a lack of learning opportunities for teachers to integrate complex emerging themes into everyday schools education (Trajber and Ramos Mendonça, 2006), as well as structural and ideological barriers to implementing robust and critical EE programmes in schools (Layrargues, 2000).

School-based EE practices

In 2003, the Ministry of the Environment held the first National Environmental Conference ‘Let’s Take Care of Brazil’, both adult and children conferences. National Conferences are stipulated in the 1988 Brazilian National Constitution and over the past 20 years have become the most important participatory policy at the national level in Brazil (Avritzer, 2012). The Children and Youth Conference led to the creation of important youth initiatives: Youth Collectives for the Environment and Sustainability (CJ-2004) and the Youth Network—REJUMA, which operate under the principle of ‘youth educates youth, youth chooses youth and one generation learns from another’.

Table 1

Summary of Conferences under the ‘Let’s Take Care of Brazil through Schools’ Programme

Title (Year)	Themes debated	Participants mobilized	Outcomes
First National Children and Youth Conference (2003)	Let’s take care of: • Our water (42%) • Our school (19%) • Our community (17%) • Living beings (12%) • Our food (10%)	15,452 schools 5,660,692 participants	Establishment of • Let’s take care of Brazil with the schools • COM-VIDAs • Youth Collectives
Second National Children and Youth Conference (2006)	International Agreements: • Climate Change/Kyoto Protocol (26%) • Biodiversity/Convention on Biological Diversity (32%) • Food Security/Rome Declaration on World Food Security (24%) • Ethnic and Racial Diversity/Durban Declaration against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (18%)	11,475 schools & communities 3,801,055 participants	Charter of Responsibilities ‘Let’s take care of Brazil’ Strengthening of the COM-VIDAs and of the Youth Collectives
Third National Children and Youth Conference (2009)	Global environmental changes: thinking + acting at school and in the community • Hydrosphere, Atmosphere, Biosphere and Sociosphere (energy and mobility) • Climate change impacts on natural systems and human populations were addressed in a cross-disciplinary manner through discussion on climate change mitigation and adaptation measures and preventive and transformative actions.	11,631 schools 3,700,000 participants	Regulations for the CONFINT Sustainable schools
First International Children and Youth Conference (2010)	Global socio-environmental changes • Hydrosphere, Atmosphere, Biosphere and Sociosphere (energy and mobility) Publications on the themes translated into 4 languages	62 countries enrolled, 47 countries present. India mobilized 80,000 schools, 9.1 million students. Other countries together mobilized 1,700,000 participants, 4,430 schools and 353,229 students	Charter of Responsibilities ‘Let’s take care of the Planet’ Methodology of Conferences reproduced in European Union, Angola, Egypt, and India (2011–2013)
Fourth National Children and Youth Conference (2013)	Let’s take care of Brazil with sustainable schools: learning to think and act in times of global environmental change.	16,945 schools	A Sustainable Schools National Programme is now under public consultation

Source: Ministry of Education. Memory of the Conferences. Retrieved 11 January 2015, from http://conferenciainfanto.mec.gov.br/2012-05-22-18-29-37/2012-05-30-19-46-17

The General Coordination of EE at MEC (Ministry of Education, 2007) launched the Programme ‘Let’s Take Care of Brazil through Schools’, which has the following four components.

Conferences: Children and youth conferences provide a platform for debating themes related to international policies, conventions, commitments, frameworks and other processes on sustainable development and have a considerable power to reach a large number of schools, students and teachers (see Table 1). For example, the Third National Children and Youth Conference (2008/2009) covered climate change under the title ‘Global Environmental Changes: thinking + acting at school and in the community’. Child-friendly materials were distributed to all primary schools in the country (107,000 copies), and two 180-hour distance (Internet) courses were offered on global socio-environmental changes for 14,860 teachers.

Capacity building and training of teachers (continuing education for teachers in service): In 2005, on-site training involved 65,648 participants from 1,815 municipalities during three days of seminars, in partnership with universities, municipal governments, NGOs and Youth Collectives.

Creation of COM-VIDAs—Commission for the Environment and Quality of Life at Schools: COM-VIDA (in Portuguese, COM-VIDA sounds the same as ‘convidar’, which means ‘invite’) is a model of socio-environmental citizenship for children and civic participation through schools. Among its purposes are to develop a lifelong EE; to build a network of School’s Agenda 21 projects; to update the Political Pedagogical Projects; to contribute to conservation and restoration of the environment and turning schools into pleasant, healthy, democratic and sustainable spaces (Ministry of Education and Ministry of the Environment, 2006). In 2013, more than 7,500 schools reported having a COM-VIDA in registering for the Fourth Children and Youth Conference, and 6,889 of them characterized their COM-VIDAs as active.¹

Sustainable Schools: In addition to children and youth conferences, teacher capacity building, and COM-VIDAs, MEC introduced the Sustainable Schools Programme in 2010, based on several government actions. In November 2007, the Interministerial Committee on Climate Change (CIM) was established, replacing the Interministerial Commission of Climate Change (CIMGC) created in 1999. In 2008, the CIM released its National Plan on Climate Change, announcing Brazil’s intention to take action domestically to curb emissions. As a measure to strengthen inter-sectoral actions for reducing vulnerability of populations, the National Plan included in its item 6 ‘implementing sustainable educational spaces through re-adapting buildings (school and university) and management, and through teacher education, inserting climate change into the curricula and teaching materials’.²

The Sustainable Schools Programme also built on the National Conference on Education (CONAE 2010), which approved a Motion to implement Sustainable Schools. EE was also included in 10,000 School Integral Education Programs (More Education Program, Decree 7083/2010 item V, art. 2). Another important action was the co-organization in 2009, by MEC and the Council for Economic and Social Development of the Presidency of the Republic, of a Forum entitled ‘Sustainability, Energy Efficiency and Environmental Education: A Challenge for Educational Institutions and Society’. The report of the Forum gave a strong support to the idea of sustainable schools, recognizing education institutions as incubators for concrete changes. Inspired by British experience and policies, the Sustainable Schools Programme aims to integrate social and educational policies in dialogue with school communities, encouraging the creation of ‘sustainable educational spaces’. In 2010, the Coordination of EE and three Federal Universities implemented an extension, online training course coupled with on-site testing on Sustainable Schools and COM-VIDAs, in 160 high schools for 1600 participants in 18 states. The Sustainable Schools Programme was included in MEC’s 2013 Plan of Joint Actions for States and Municipalities and allocated R$ 100 million as a budget for two years. In 2013, 939 schools received funds, and in 2014, 3,815 schools received instalments over two semesters.

At national level, these four components interact with one another and reach a significant number of schools, but the evaluation of the impact of these programmes is mixed. While regional surveys show that these programmes leave schools unattended and are incipient and superficial (Garcia, 2010; Mohedano, 2010), case studies assess that Conferences, COM-VIDAs and Sustainable Schools have positively impacted schools, serving as a catalyst for conceptual advances and policies in EE with their emphasis on participation (Camboim and Barbosa, 2012; Garcia, 2010; Toro-Tonissi and Santos, 2014).

EE in Higher Education and TVET

Whereas school-based EE is widespread in Brazil as shown in the preceding sections, there have not been systematic, large-scale efforts to integrate EE in higher education and technical and vocational education and training (TVET). A joint survey by MEC and the University Network of Programs in EE (RUPEA) (entitled Mapping Environmental Education in Brazilian Institutions of Higher Education: Elements for Public Policies) collected data on teaching, research, extension and management. Despite the increasing urgency for training professionals for building sustainable societies, the survey results confirmed the diagnosis of the limitations, contradictions and challenges facing academic institutions to deal with the dilemmas of contemporary societies (Oliveira et al., 2006). For example, in departmentalized, bureaucratic and hierarchical higher education institutions, integrating innovative methodological and theoretical frameworks to realize inter- and trans-disciplinary EE in their all major areas of work is itself a daunting task. Moreover, EE often lacks financial support and academic infrastructure for the development of new projects. The respondents to the survey attributed this lack of funding support to a ‘marginal’ status of EE, especially when it is presented as a set of actions with critical and emancipatory ideological content (Oliveira et al., 2006).

MEC’s Extension Programme PROEXT³ is also relevant in discussing EE in higher education, as extension refers to processes which promote a transformative interaction between universities and other sectors of society, mediated by undergraduate students and supervised by one or more instructors, under the principle of the constitutional inseparability between teaching and research. The PROEXT 2014 included EE for the first time as one of the themes, and the PROEXT 2015 announcement included themes such as climate change, disaster risk reduction, sustainable agriculture, sustainable mobility, sustainable schools and interconnections among them.

Along with higher education, TVET has a major role to play in facilitating a transition to sustainability. Despite an impressive expansion of federal professional and vocational education in Brazil,⁴ integration of EE/ESD into this area has not taken place. The Economic and Social Development Council (CDES) of the Presidency of the Republic published a report on Green Jobs, pointing its importance for adaptation to climate change, vital to protect jobs and livelihoods (CDES, 2009). Policies to promote green jobs are designed and implemented with ILO’s technical support to the conceptual development and practical implementation at the federal and state levels since 2009 (ILO, n.d.). These initiatives, however, do not seem to have any influence over the National Access to Technical Education and Employment (PRONATEC), created by MEC in 2011.

CLIMATE CHANGE EDUCATION IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

Education in Climate Change Policies and Sectoral Plans

The key issue regarding environmental governance in Brazil is one of implementation of policies, as opposed to the lack of legal principles and instruments. Brazil has adopted strong climate change legislation. The National Plan on Climate Change released in 2008, which outlined an ambitious strategy for lower emissions, was complemented by the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC), which was passed in December 2009 and established an overall voluntary emission reduction target of 36.1–38.9 per cent below its baseline emissions scenario by 2020.⁵ In order to meet the voluntary commitment, the Mitigation and Adaptation Sectoral Plans were developed, but an Education Sectoral Plan is not one of them.⁶ Most of the Sectoral Plans pay superficial attention to education, typically treating it in a generic and instrumental way, such as ‘promoting awareness and environmental education’. There are few examples where education is explicitly recognized. The National Policy on Solid Waste Residue and Climate Change (Law 12305/2010) includes education as ‘Instrument VIII—environmental education activities that promote non-generation, reduction, reuse and recycling solid waste’. Another example is the Health Sectoral Plan for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change launched in 2013, which establishes measures through four axes of intervention: health surveillance, health care, health promotion and education and health research. The Health Sectoral Plan recognizes that the health system must be able to cope with the possible negative impacts on health caused by dry weather, heat waves, flooding, including psychosocial disorders related to stress caused by extreme weather events.

It is also important to note that Brazil was instrumental in the conception and negotiation of the UNFCCC Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and is a major international player in the carbon markets. This has major implications for how the government treats public awareness, training and education initiatives on climate change. For example, the National Fund on Climate Change (NFCC, Law 12114/2009; Decree 7343/2010) has a specific non-reimbursable Education, Training and Mobilization Area, and resources allocated to Education over the first two years of operation comprised approximately 9 per cent of the available resources.⁷ The Fund is not open to spontaneous demands and the current priority is to strengthen the Brazilian Panel on Climate Change (PBMC), which is a national scientific body, and the Brazilian Forum on Climate Change (FBMC). The FBMC (Decree 3515/2000), chaired by the President of the Republic, aims to raise awareness and mobilize society on the CDM.⁸ In 2008, the FBMC launched a handbook on General Global Warming issues in partnership with Petrobrás (oil and natural gas company) aiming at ‘the promotion, dissemination and analysis of interactions concerning climate change records and the functioning of the energy market’.⁹ The following section introduces educational programmes in the sectors most relevant to the governance of climate change in the Brazilian context, namely energy, science and technology, and disaster risk reduction (DRR).

CCE in the Energy Sector: Energy Education and Beyond

Brazil’s unique geography and policies advancing ethanol and hydropower makes the country unique in the global climate change regime. Due to the large share of renewable energy source in its energy mix, Brazil is not a major producer of fossil fuel-based emissions. Brazil’s mega-hydropower facilities, notably the Itaipú and Tucuruí hydropower plants, greatly contribute to Brazil’s unique low-carbon energy matrix whereby hydropower provides approximately 85 per cent of all power generation and a little less than 80 per cent of total installed electricity-generating capacity (Cole and Liverman, 2011: 145; Held et al., 2012: 50). Brazil is nonetheless one of the major net producers of greenhouse gases due to the country’s rate of deforestation in the Amazon (Held et al., 2012).

Energy efficiency is an area in which Brazil has a particular strength, and state-owned and semi-public energy companies have a long tradition of running educational programmes (Dias et al., 2004), but often with a focus on more instrumental EE. For example, the National Electricity Conservation Program (PROCEL) by Eletrobrás (electric power company) was established in 1985. As a Federal Government Program coordinated by the Ministry of Mines and Energy, PROCEL has produced electric energy conservation textbooks for different sectors and run programmes for primary and secondary schools, providing training courses for teachers.¹⁰ Another example is the National Program of Rationalization of the Use of Oil Derivative and Natural Gas (CONPET) created by a presidential decree in 1991 and housed in Petrobrás. An exceptional case among the energy company initiatives is by Itaipú Binacional, the world’s largest hydropower plant situated in the Paraná River Basin. In 2003, Itaipú Binacional launched a series of sustainable development projects to address climate change and water issues. Among these projects, the ‘Cultivating Good Water (Cultivando a Água Boa)’ programme comes closest to an ideal EE/ESD programme which addresses all dimensions of sustainable development and is aimed at positive societal transformation.¹¹

CCE in the Science and Technology Sector: Science Education and DRR Education

With climate change long being regarded by the government as a ‘technical, scientific and foreign policy concern’, climate change policymaking in Brazil has traditionally been the domain of the Ministry of External Relations and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI) (Held et al., 2012: 58). Although the creation of the Interministerial Commission of Climate Change (CIMGC) in 1999 established an integrated, crosscutting governance body within the Brazilian government, the MCTI continues to be an important actor in the governance of climate change. For example, the MCTI acts as the Designated National Authority of Brazil’s CDM framework.

Science Education

The MCTI has undertaken CCE activities in the context of Science Education. For example, the Brazilian Space Agency (Agência Espacial Brasileira: AEB) under the MCTI created the AEB School Program, which produced in partnership with the FBMC three volume books on Intermediary Science Education: Astronomy, Astronautics and Climate Change. MEC distributed 200,000 copies of the high-school level book, but this was done without providing specific capacity building activities for teachers.

In 2008, the MCTI created the National Institute of Science and Technology for Climate Change (INCT-MC), a comprehensive network of interdisciplinary research on climate change and is based on the cooperation of 65 national research groups spread all over the country and 17 international research groups.¹² It is the largest environmental research network Brazil has ever developed. To provide high-quality and relevant scientific information on climate change, INCT-MC launched 13 thematic sub-networks but education is not one of them.¹³ Capacity building and outreach activities under the INCT-MC, nevertheless, are highly developed due to a large number of universities in the network. INCT-MC produced an interactive CD-ROM in an e-learning format on Education for Climate Change.¹⁴

CCE in the context of disaster risk reduction (DRR)

Like other emerging economies and developing countries, Brazil is also vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change.¹⁵ Global climate change and deforestation may lead to major shifts in the hydrological system of the Amazon. Brazilian scientists claim that although there are still few studies on the impacts of extreme weather events, they are likely to affect Brazil’s ecosystems with potentially catastrophic consequences for the whole region (INCT-MC, 2010). Human health and human settlements are vulnerable, especially in coastal lowlands, mega-cities and environmentally and socio-economically marginal areas. Climate change adaptation should therefore be tackled together with pervasive social inequalities in the country.

Brazil’s Law 12608/2012 created a National Protection and Civil Defence Policy (PNPDEC), which stipulates that the primary and secondary education curriculum should cover the principles of civil defence and EE in an integrated form as part of compulsory content (Article 26 of Chapter III).¹⁶ In 2012, the MCTI created a Centre for Monitoring and Early Warnings of Natural Disasters (Cemaden), which installed an early warning system. Cemaden launched an informal DRR education project called ‘Pluviometers in the Community’. Through this project, 1,100 semi-automatic digital rain gauges were installed to be operated by community teams trained to collect data on rainfall.¹⁷ The project allows the community to quickly organize, contact local authorities, and receive guidance in order to take immediate action in emergencies. At the beginning of 2014, the Centre created a new project called ‘Cemaden Education: schools and communities network for disaster risk prevention’, which extends to formal education the strategies developed by the Pluviometers in the Community project. The pilot project supports three São Paulo State public high schools located in vulnerable areas to integrate interdisciplinary teaching on scientific methodologies such as monitoring, data collection, interviews, and mapping and to build a social protection network through working with communities and various social actors concerning disaster risk management. Local interventions are stimulated through special Com-Vida for the prevention of disasters and the protection of life. These schools are envisioned to serve as pilots for expanding to more than 800 schools across 23 states in 2015.

DISCUSSION

Towards More Effective EE and CCE

The Ministry of Education’s approach to EE has consistently aimed at building innovative and mobilizing programmes. Given the size and regional and cultural diversity of the county, it has been successful in terms of reaching a significant number of schools, educators, students and communities. Nevertheless, challenges remain in terms of enhancing the impact of the existing EE frameworks and programmes. First, the school-based EE policies do not reach all schools, as engagement is voluntary and dependent on the will and capacity of each state, municipality and school. Second, it is difficult to assess and measure in depth the effectiveness of the programmes developed, in order to understand gaps between what public policies propose and actual practice of EE in schools (Jacobi et al., 2011). Third, teachers need initial and continued capacity building on sophisticated and complex issues and concepts. Fourth, the implementation of EE suffers from chronic and structural problems of the Brazilian education system such as high teacher turnover rates, excessive centralization and the lack of autonomy of teachers and schools, parents’ disinterest and low participation in school life (Camboim and Barbosa, 2012; Garcia, 2010; Mohedano, 2010).

The Ministry of the Environment, in its public policy proposal on EE in the context of climate change, identified new challenges for EE, including building the necessary sense of urgency, highlighting the role of human actions in addressing sustainability rather than purely technological solutions, communicating the links between complex phenomena and everyday life, building and expanding partnerships with all segments of society and the three spheres of government (federal, state and municipal), and proposing practical projects and a feasible and transformative public policy (Ministry of the Environment, 2010).

CCE can be characterized as a ‘peripheral issue in education’, both in the academic research and in practice (Jacobi et al., 2011). From a pedagogical perspective, there is an urgent need to move past apathy, paralysis and resistance and towards action on climate solutions. CCE cannot be studied in isolation, since it risks focusing on partial and technical approaches to a limited set of themes such as global warming, carbon emissions, disaster prevention, energy efficiency, recycling, transportation and so on. When partial and technological solutions to climate change are developed without taking into account biodiversity, for example, it would be acceptable to plant genetically-modified eucalyptus trees in order to reduce carbon emissions. It is a consensus among Brazilian environmental educators that CCE disconnected from a holistic EE approach does not foster understanding and learning about transformations needed for a transition to sustainable societies (Jacobi et al., 2011).

Towards Integrated Policies

Some authors also note the absence of macro-management plans for integrated policies in government, both within the national and sub-national spheres (Sotero and Sorrentino, 2010). EE policies and programmes still have a limited impact on mainstream Brazilian educational, environmental and climate change policies, among others (Loureiro and Soares de Lima, 2012). Although there are numerous ongoing activities related to climate change, different ministries in the federal government do not necessarily interact to create synergies among them. The lack of dialogue and appropriate governance mechanisms that recognize and include EE is a major obstacle which must be tackled. Furthermore, the Ministry of the Environment was established only in 1985 and public policies in the area are rather vulnerable to pressures from other powerful sectors of the government and society, as most clearly manifested in the 2008 resignation of the then Environment Minister Marina Silva.

In addition to ensuring cooperation between different areas of domestic policy, the connection and linkages between domestic policies and foreign policies are also posing a major challenge to the governance of climate change. Indeed a recent comparative study of the governance of climate change in developing countries and emerging economies including Brazil has observed a ‘disconnect’ between domestic policy making and foreign policies on climate change (Held et al., 2012). In the field of climate policy, it is increasingly important to intensify international cooperation and make it more effective. Along with China, India and South Africa, Brazil holds a key to strengthening the global governance of climate change.

Global challenges such as climate change require a new level of cross-sector and multi-stakeholder collaboration and complementary strategies for achieving shared goals. An examination of the science–policy interface in Brazil points out that to date little research has probed the role of social networks, culture, interests and scientific information on climate change in the formulation of climate policy in Brazil (Brazilian Research Network on Global Climate Change, 2011). From academic and civil society perspectives, there is a perception of fragmentation of knowledge, both within the government and across a number of different actors, particularly non-governmental organizations and business initiatives (Jacobi et al., 2011). Much more needs to be done to develop integrated approaches to enhance climate response through education.

WAYS FORWARD

…fair, happy and sustainable societies with responsibilities and actions that fulfil dreams and needs’

The Charter of Responsibilities, Third National Children and Youth Conference on Let’s Take Care of Brazil

In addition to ensuring policy coherence and enhancing law enforcement and policy implementation, there remains the most important and challenging task to develop creative educational and learning strategies to transform how citizens and decision makers think and act towards sustainability. Among the main challenges to be faced by EE/ESD researchers and practitioners is to achieve coherence between political discourse and pedagogical practice, at different scales of national and international public policies, without compromising the nature of EE/ESD as holistic and transformational education. EE/ESD should address the root causes of unsustainable development and the interconnected nature of sustainability challenges and empower people to determine how to live together sustainably—in ways that do not further undermine the carrying capacity of the Earth and ways that do not create, perpetuate or exacerbate social injustice.

In the ongoing discussions on the post-2015 agenda, there is an increasing recognition of a dual agenda of international cooperation: the agenda of development cooperation and the agenda of international cooperation for addressing global challenges. International cooperation that goes beyond traditional North–South development cooperation is more important today than ever before, both for promoting well-being within the country’s borders and for global justice and solidarity. Effective CCE in the overall context of EE and ESD should be able to contribute to boosting international cooperation by empowering people to be ‘global citizens’ who ‘engage and assume active roles, both locally and globally, to face and resolve global challenges and ultimately to become proactive contributors to a more just, peaceful, tolerant, inclusive, secure and sustainable world’ (UNESCO, 2014: 15).

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This article is based on a policy review commissioned by UNESCO to inform the development of UNESCO policy guidelines on climate change education in the context of ESD. The authors are responsible for the choice and representation of the facts contained in this article and for the opinions expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.

Notes

References

Avritzer

(2012). Conferências Nacionais: ampliando e redefinindo os padrões de participação no Brasil. Texto para Discussão [National Conferences: Expanding and redefining the standards of participation in Brazil. Discussion Paper]. Rio de Janeiro: IPEA—Institute of Applied Economic Research.

Brazilian Research Network on Global Climate Change (Rede Brasileira de Pesquisas sobre Mudanças Climáticas Globais). (2011). Relatório de Atividades, 2010–2011 [Activity Report 2010–2011]. Retrieved from http://www.ccst.inpe.br/wp-content/themes/ccst-2.0/pdf/Relatorio_RC_Nov_2011.pdf

Camboim

J.F.F.

Barbosa

A.G.

(2012). Estratégias de educação ambiental por meio da atuação da Com-Vida: vivências em uma escola do Recife-PE [EE strategies through the performance of Com-Vida: Schools experiences from Recife-PE]. HOLOS, Ano, 28(1), 124–136.

CDES (2009). Report of the conference on green jobs and sustainable buildings-08/2009. Working Group of Energy Matrix, Development with Equity and Environmental Responsibility of the Economic and Social Development Council—CDES.

Cole

J.C.

Liverman

D.M.

(2011). Brazil’s clean development mechanism governance in the context of Brazil’s historical environment–development discourses. Carbon Management, 2(2), 145–160.

Dias

R.A.

Mattos

C.R.

Balestieri

J.A.

P. (2004). Energy education: Breaking up the rational energy use barriers. Energy Policy, 32, 1339–1347.

European Commission. (2007). Country strategy paper—Brazil 2007–2013. Retrieved from http://eeas.europa.eu/brazil/csp/07_13_en.pdf

Garcia

Áurea da Silva

(2010). Comissões de Meio Ambiente e Qualidade de Vida na Escola: os desafios da educação ambiental como política pública. [Environmental Commissions for Quality of Life at Schools: Challenges for environmental education as public policy] (Unpublished MS dissertation). UFMS, Campo Grande.

Held

Nag

Roger

(2012). The governance of climate change in developing countries: A report on international and domestic climate change politics in China, Brazil, Ethiopia and Tuvalu. À Savoir, 15. Paris: Agence Française de Développement (AFD), France.

10.

ILO (n.d.). Green jobs country brief: Brazil. Retrieved from http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/--integration/documents/publication/wcms_149662.pdf

11.

INCT-MC (National Institute of Science and Technology for Climate Change). (2010). 2009–2010 Activity Report. São José dos Campos, São Paulo: INCT-MC.

12.

Jacobi

P.R.

Guerra

A.F.S

Sulaiman

S.N.

Nepomuceno

(2011). Mudanças climáticas globais: a resposta da educação [Global climate change: The response of education]. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 16(46), 135–148. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbedu/v16n46/v16n46a08.pdf

13.

Layrargues

P.P.

(2000). Solving local environmental problems in environmental education: The Brazilian case study. Environmental Education Research, 6(2), 167–178.

14.

Loureiro

C.F.B.

Soares de Lima

M.J.G.

(2012). Ampliando o debate entre educação e educação ambiental. [Extending the debate between education and environmental education]. Revista Contemporânea de Educação, Nº 14.

15.

Ministry of Education, Brazil. (2007). EducaçãoAmbiental: aprendizes de sustentabilidade [Environmental Education: Learners of sustainability]. Brasília: Cadernos SECAD/MEC.

16.

Ministry of Education and Ministry of the Environment, Brazil. (2006). Órgão Gestor da PolíticaNacional de EducaçãoAmbiental. Comissão de MeioAmbiente e Qualidade de Vida nas Escolas - Com-Vida [Governing Body of the National Environmental Education Policy. Committee for the Environment and Quality of Life in Schools—COM-VIDAS] (Série DocumentosTécnicos nº 10). Brasília: Secad/MEC.

17.

Ministry of the Environment, Brazil. (2005). Programa Nacional de Educação Ambiental—ProNEA [National Programme for Environmental Education]—ProNEA (Third Edition). Brasília: MMA (Ministério do MeioAmbiente).

18.

Ministry of the Environment, Brazil. (2010). Uma proposta de política pública: Parâmetros e Diretrizes para a Educação Ambiental no contexto das Mudanças Climáticas causadas pela ação humana. [A public policy proposal: Definitions and Guidelines for environmental education in the context of climate change caused by human action]. Brasília. Retrieved from http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/educamb/_arquivos/ea_e_mudclim__doctodeammaprincipios_e_diretrizes_vp01_20.pdf

19.

Mochizuki

(2010). Global circulation and local manifestations of education for sustainable development with a focus on Japan. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 9(1/2/3) (Special Issue on Sustainable Development and Environmental Education), 37–57.

20.

Mohedano

(2010). Panorama das Comissões de Meio Ambiente e Qualidade de Vida nas Escolas (COM-VIDA) enquanto política pública emergente [Overview of Committee for the Environment and Quality of Life in Schools (COM-VIDA) as an emerging public policy] (Unpublished technical report written for Projeto 914BRA1109). Brasilia: UNESCO/MEC.

21.

Oliveira

H.T.

Farias

C.R.O.

Pavesi

Cinquetti

H.C.

S. (2006). Mapeamento da Educação Ambiental em Instituições Brasileiras de Educação Superior: elementos para políticas públicas. [Mapping of environmental education in Brazilian Institutions of higher education: Elements of public policy] (Série DocumentosTécnicos nº 12.). Brasília: Secad/MEC. Retrieved from http://portal.mec.gov.br/pesquisas

22.

Sorrentino

Trajber

Mendonça

Ferraro

L.A. Jr.

(2005). Educação ambiental como política pública [Environmental education as a public policy]. Educação e Pesquisa, SP, 31(2), 285–299.

23.

Sotero

J.P.

Sorrentino

(2010). Proceedings of the Fifth National Meeting of the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Environment and Society (ANPPAS): A Educação Ambiental como Política Pública: Reflexões sobre seu Financiamento [Environmental education as a public policy: Reflections on its financing]. FlorianÓpolis, Brazil: ANPPAS. Retrieved from http://www.anppas.org.br/encontro5/cd/gt6.html.

24.

Toro-Tonissi

R.M.

Santos

J.M.

. (2014). Proceedings of the Symposium on Public Policies for Environmental Education for Sustainable Societies. Avaliação da atuação da Comissão de Meio Ambiente e Qualidade de Vida de uma Escola Municipal de Barretos/SP e a inserção da educação ambiental no currículo [Review of the performance of the commission for the environment and quality of life of a municipal school of Barretos/SP and the inclusion of environmental education in the curriculum]. São Carlos: OCA/Piracicaba: ESALq/Diagrama Editorial.

25.

Trajber

Ramos Mendonça

(2006). O que fazem as escolas que dizem que fazem Educação Ambiental? [What are they doing the schools that say they do Environmental Education?] Brasília: MEC and UNESCO Brazil. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001545/154576por.pdf

26.

Treaty on Environmental Education for Sustainable Societies and Global Responsibility. (1992). Global Forum at ECO 92 and Second International Journey at Rio+20. Retrieved from http://tratadoeducacaoambiental.net/Jornada/docs/Jornada_ING.pdf

27.

UNESCO (2014). Global citizenship education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century. Paris: UNESCO.

28.

UNICEF (2012).Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction in the education sector: Resource manual. New York: UNICEF. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/education/files/UNICEF-ClimateChange-ResourceManual-lores-c%281%29.pdf

29.

Veiga

Amorim

É.

Blanco

(2005). Um retrato da presença da Educação Ambiental no ensino fundamental brasileiro: o percurso de um processo acelerado de expansão [A portrait of the presence of environmental education in Brazilian elementary education: The route of an accelerated expansion process]. Brasília: Inep/MEC.

30.

Wals

A.E.J.

(2012). Learning our way out of unsustainability: The role of environmental education. In Clayton

(Ed.), Oxford handbook on environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 628–644). Oxford: Oxford University Press.