Environmental Assessment and Judgment Competences - A key Issue for ESD

1. Jan Barkmann Environmental & Resource Economics Institute for Agricultural Economics & Interdisciplinary Centre for Sustainable Development (IZNE) Georg-August Universität Göttingen Environmental Assessment and Judgment Competences - A key Issue for ESD University of Bath, Octobre 7, 2004, Bath (United Kingdom)

2. Overview • ESD and critical thinking skills • Factual and ethical uncertainties and complexities • Decision-making skills in the face of complexity/uncertainty • ESD and Rational Choice

3. Part 1ESD and critical thinking 1

4. Sustainable Development (SD) and systematic assessment skills • urgent global problems • Brundtland/WCED approach to SD • ultimately social problems • (basic) needs, (environmental) justice • systematically choose suitable course of action • retinity (SRU/German Council of Environmental Advisors 1994) • interrelatedness of ecology, economy and society • socio-environmental assessmentskills 1

5. Environmental/Scientific Literacy • Scientific Literacy • „is the capacity to use scientific knowledge, to identify questions and to draw evidence-based conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the natural worldand the changes made to it through human activity.“ (OECD 1999) • explore relation to critical thinking 1

6. Environmental/Scientific Literacy • Scientific Literacy • „is the capacity to use scientific knowledge, to identify questions and to draw evidence-based conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the natural worldand the changes made to it through human activity.“ (OECD 1999) • complexity and uncertainty challenges • factual: “non-linear logics” • ethical: conflicting norms and values 1

7. Definitions of Critical Thinking (Maiorana 1992) • correct assessment of statements • find and reflect „truth“ in a domain of knowledge • productive thinking leading to new knowledge • analysis, conclusions, criteria-based assessment • generalisation, innovation, decision-making 1

8. logical, creative and pragmatic aspects • correct assessment of statements • find and reflect „truth“ in a domain of knowledge • productive thinking leading to new knowledge • analysis, conclusions, criteria-based assessment • generalisation, innovation, decision-making 1

9. logical,creative and pragmatic aspects • correct assessment of statements • find and reflect „truth“ in a domain of knowledge • productive thinking leading to new knowledge • analysis, conclusions, criteria-based assessment • generalisation, innovation, decision-making 1

10. logical, creative andpragmatic aspects • correct assessment of statements • find and reflect „truth“ in a domain of knowledge • productive thinking leading to new knowledge • analysis, conclusions, criteria-based assessment • generalisation, innovation, decision-making 1

11. Part 2Factual and ethical uncertainties and complexities 2

12. Biomagnification 0,02 water 5,3 plankton concentration of DDD [ppm] small fish 10 fish of prey 150 1600 waterfowl (from Begon, Harper & Townsend 1998:437) according to Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 2

13. Factual Complexity 0,02 water “Humans are able to influence ecosystems […], but in a complex, non-linear, feedback-modified fashion which is unlikely to result in precisely the outcomes initially planned, and is capable in principle of inducing catastrophe.” (Scott & Gough 2003:8) 5,3 plankton 10 small fish  fish of prey 150 1600 waterfowl according to Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 2

14. non-linearities • exponential growth, threshold effects, positive & negative feed-back loops, strategic versus co-operative action • spatial and temporal gaps between cause and effect • risks and uncertain knowledge • focus of cybernetics and systems teaching • Meadows et al. 1972, Vester 1974 • environmental psychology • „everyday rationality“ (Dörner 1993:137) 2

15. „Traditional“ focus ofenvironmental education • National “BLK” Framework for Sustainable Development 1998 • “systemic, interconnected thinking” • syndroms of global change (WBGU) • Cassel-Gintz & Harenberg 2002, Rost et al. 2003, Lauströer et al. 2003 2

16. local example: Orchard Assessment • combines factual and ethical uncertainty/complexity • relate to critical thinking skills Storyline: • three orchards offered • resources only available for one • an multi-partisan committee is set up 2

17. local example: Orchard Assessment extensive intensive 2

18. Description (factual model) according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 2

19. descriptive data/criteria according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 2

20. Suitability of factual model? according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 • critical thinking • facts and opinions? • type of model? • ecological interconnections? • “systems thinking” • sufficient data quality? • … 2

21. Ethical Uncertainty/Complexity • conflicting values • yield vs. biodiversity? • yield vs. access? • aesthetics vs. costs? • challenges of Sustainable Development • efficiency vs. (social/intergenerational) justice? • short-term vs. long-term? 2

22. Suitability of normative model? according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 • critical thinking • utility versus deontological aspects? • plurality of values? • selection of criteria? • weighing of criteria? • … 2

23. Intermediate Summary • In the face of • urgent problems of sustainable development, • beset with factual and ethical complexity/uncertainty, • students and citizens need • systematic skills for • socio-environmental assessment and decision-making. 2

24. Part 3Decision-making skills in the face of complexity/uncertainty 3

25. Definition I • Ecological assessmentcompetence is the skill • to systematically connect • ecological knowledge • to relevant socio-environmental values • in order to prepare judgments on alternative courses of action. 3

26. Definition II • Ecological judgment competence • includes the reflection on (own) norms and values • and the communication skills for a search for consensus or fair compromise. 3

27. non-linearities (food web!) temporal/spatial gap between causeand effect (pesticide!), etc. factual complexity content knowledge judg-ment assess-ment decision action norms, values fruit yield, biodiversity landscape aesthetics costs ethical complexity according to Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 3

28. Systematic Assessment Skills • instruction strategy “explicit assessment” • identification, selection, justification, weighing, and combination of assessment criteria • critical thinking in deliberative setting • first empirical studies • huge deficits in high-school students and teacher students • aesthetic criteria not regarded as appropriate • “explicit assessment” fosters recognition of plurality of values 3

29. Part 4ESD and Rational Choice 4

30. Economic or instrumental rationality • choose “best” course of action • maximise goal attainment with given means (“maximise profit or utility”) • attain goal while minimising the employment of means (“minimise costs”) 4

31. orchard assessment: criteria according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 4

32. orchard assessment: criteria according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 4

33. weighing factor according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 4

34. according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 4

35. computation and decision according to Barkmann & Bögeholz 2003, Bögeholz & Barkmann 2003 4

36. “economic” assessment methods • “real world” situations • landscape planning, transportantion infrastrukture planning • policy impact assessments • algorithm (Bastian & Schreiber 1999:61) • define goal • select assessment procedure • define criteria and measurement protocols • sample data • weigh and combine criteria • interpret result (decision-making) • rational choice based on systematic assessment 4

37. “economic” assessment methods • “real world” situations • landscape planning, transportantion infrastrukture planning • policy impact assessments • algorithm (Bastian & Schreiber 1999:61) • define goal • select assessment procedure • define criteria and measurement protocols • sample data • weigh and combine criteria • interpret result (decision-making) • rational choice based on systematic assessment • UK: predominance of CBA? 4

38. Rational Choice • descriptive social science paradigm • actors • preferences (goals) • resources/restrictions • rules • „hard“ rational choice • goals are given (not questioned) • one rule: “maximise self-interest” • educationally, questionable paradigm • UK: CBA questionable? 4

39. The answer: explicit assessment • define goal • … • define criteria… • … • weight and combine criteria • interpret result (decision-making) use economic rationality,but apply critical thinking in deliberative setting onethical complexity 4

40. CBA? - explicit assessment! • define goal • … • define criteria… • … • weight and combine criteria • interpret result (decision-making) take care of environmental justice! account for (all) TEV components K.O. criteria?social justice? discounting? monetary weights? safe minimum standards? competing projects? 4

41. Philosophical Background • Habermasian Discourse Ethics • cognitivist ethics • fusion of deontological and utilitarian ideas • mind the consequences, but do so from a common goods perspetive • differences • focus on norms and values • definition of value-based norms for the design of the shared world • exploit/employ part of the „system“ • formal/economics decision-making aids, computer models to prevent the actual colonisation of the „lifeworld“ by better organised, vested interests 4

42. Limits • emancipative • but not necessarily radical discourse • empowering device • but not necessarily challenging power relations • encourages the recognition of a plurality of values, and the conventional character of „scientific“ decision-making • but maintains the possibility/ desirability of truthful descriptions, informed consent and fair compromise • a modern, not a post-modern approach. 4

43. Summary • Sustainable Development (Education) requires skills for systematic decision-making in the face of factual and ethical complexity. • Skill levels of ecological assessment and judgment competences likely very low. • Partial adoption of economics-style rationality required… … but in a deliberative and critical thinking setting.

44. Thank you very much!