Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
10 A Mode! of Community-Based Environmental Education Elaine Andrews, Mark Stevens, and Greg Wise This chapter focuses on one model for achieving community flexibility and responsiveness to environmental issues. The model, termed commu- nity-based environmental education, differs from traditional education in that the educational activities not only build individual knowledge and skills, but also help to build an infrastructure for change that is sustainable, equitable, and empowenng. When the "classroom" is the community, an education strategy can take the form of employee training, media marketing, "point of purchase" information, workshops, study circles, one-on-one demonstrations, or a group initiative to gather data about a local problem. Typically, the educator chooses the education or diffusion strategy and bases the choice on considerations of the topic; audi- ence skills; and personal skills and resources. But in community-based environ- mental education, the educator has an unconventional role. The community- based model presented in this chapter emphasizes selection of the education strategy in a way that also builds local skills and supports voluntary actions. Practitioners work in collaboration with the community to choose a strategy; to consider how and when the strategy could be used; and to guide whether the strategy is applied alone or in combination with others. The "community" of the community-based environmental education model may be a community of place; a community of identity; or a community of interest.) In each situation, the intent is to build the skills of citizens to gather, analyze, and apply information for the purpose of making environmental man- agement decisions. Successful application of the model contributes to the "envi- ronmental policy capacity" of the community, as described by Press and Balch (this volume, Chapter 11~. 161
162 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION To ensure that education activities will support long-term and/or structural change, this collaborative strategy invites those involved to ask questions such as: . . . Are the goals of the activity determined by a bottom-up process, or a top- down process? · Is the intervention targeted narrowly to a specific audience or broadly to whole populations? Is the locus of control generated by individuals or community groups, or by marketing agents? ("Locus of control" is a term that refers to the source of personal empowerment. Does the person's sense of power to act come from within, or from the group, or is the person affected by an external agent?) Is the interest group actively involved in creating information and target- ing research, or is the interest group a passive consumer of information? · Does the intervention build sustainability for its impacts by engaging people at different levels of responsibility within the community (such as property owners, political leaders, and the agency that has jurisdiction)? Community-based environmental education incorporates public participation, social marketing, environmental education, and right-to-know strategies. Measures that contribute to the effectiveness of volunteer activities also are encompassed in this model. The community-based model, however, contrasts with Ramsey's defi- nition of environmental education, in that community-based environmental educa- tion goals incorporate a behavior change or policy change objective. Community education goals are designed to be responsive to the reality of the community economic, political, and social contexts. Application of specific education and dissemination elements is described in other chapters in this volume (Lutzenhiser, Chapter 3; Schultz, Chapter 4; Th0gersen, Chapter 5; Mileti and Peek, Chapter 7; Valente and Schuster, Chapter 6; Ramsey and Hungerford, Chapter 9; Nash, Chap- ter 14; Herb et al., Chapter 15; Harrison, Chapter 16~. DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION MODEL The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) both recognize that managing the environment requires investment in the community for two powerful reasons: (1) local activities affect the quality of the local environment, and (2) community members have a com- mon interest in protecting and improving their community's quality of life. Con- sequently, these agencies have promoted environmental management via local decision-making and voluntary compliance with regulations and have consid- ered ways to support these situation-specific processes and offer more effective environmental education.
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 163 Guided by research that describes how community members work together to make change (Wise, 1998) and how individuals make decisions about what they will do (in this volume, see Lutzenhiser, Chapter 3; Schultz, Chapter 4, Th0gersen, Chapter 5; Stern, Chapter 12), the EPA and USDA Cooperative Ex- tension worked in partnership to investigate potential qualities of community- based environmental education. The resulting Community-Based Environmental Education (CBEE) model was defined through a four-part process: (1) by exam- ining community efforts that had a common goal of improving local environ- mental management; (2) by consulting theoretical writings along with empirical studies of "what works"; (3) by identifying what appeared to be the critical elements of a common model; and (4) by then presenting the written model to practitioners for review (Andrews, 1998~.2 3 What we learned from the EPA/USDA Partnership project is that effective community-based environmental education builds on community development processes (including problem solving, community building, and systems interac- tion) and focuses on generating positive actions, rather than criticism or protest of current policies (see Figure 10-1~. In a community-based education model, a community:4 . . Has or establishes a vision and goals, · Inspires an instigator who, stimulated by these goals, enlists or gathers a group or coalition to start an initiative and to keep it going, · Supports group activities to gather and analyze information, and finally Through the group, engages the larger community in carrying out what it has learned through policy changes, new regulations, and/or education. For example, property owners around Lake Example have a recognized or implicit vision for clean and healthy water. Inspired by this vision, the president of the property owners' association initiates a project to establish a wastewater collection system. To implement the project, property association members and other interested people would need to learn what technology is needed, how much it would cost, who would pay for it, what benefits would result, and what other ways are available to solve the same problem. Once the information is collected and analyzed, the owners' association might develop an information campaign to reduce local use of lawn and garden pesticides and lobby a govern- ment representative to propose an ordinance that requires a wastewater collec- tion system to be installed around all local lakes. Feedback from these new activities influences community vision and goals, and the process begins again. Each of these actions, viewed separately, can be seen as similar to a great deal of everyday community activity. What is distinctive about the CBEE model is that it integrates the elements as a linked chain. With such an inherently complex structure, it is difficult to estimate potential outcomes and impacts for the CBEE model as a whole. A number of studies relevant to the model, howev-
164 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION \ /' ~ OCAL \ \ ; Community ~ Ins~tigato~ I \ establishes ~ identify ~ _ \~ Vision arid goals~F stakeholders f ~ ~` _ _ if ~ --= ~ / Feedback \ Rae ~ / influences \ ~OLLAElORATIVE~ l / community ~ / I . d . . ~ ~ Instigators an stakehoiders ~ / integrate group activities with ~ \ ~ communil;y goals ~ \ _ ,# 1~-~-~--~-- ~ - ~ ~ _ \ INFORMED Group Activities: 7 ~ ~ ~ f _ ~ ~ _ ~ A. / Assess a-' Gather ~PIan Actions ~ C. - A_ _ ~ _J~ _ \ OLD =~ ·yL~ <_ ,, from tl~t,¢< ~ _ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / '/A$sess ~ Informati~ Community _ jeep $ ~ C Perspective Ad Ad /? i~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ _ ~ I rouuces action am criange ~ FIGURE 10-1 Building capacity: Applying the principles of community-based educa- tion. er, have been published since the original project was completed. Their implica- tions are discussed later in this chapter. WHAT IS COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION? Community-based education means more than "education based in the com- munity." It implies an education plan created as a result of community involve- ment and designed to match community interests.5 "Community interests" refer to standard community issues, such as affordable housing or workforce develop- ment, as well as to activities with a recognizable environmental component such
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 165 as road building, stormwater management, "permitting" a new development, or addressing environmental health concerns in an urban neighborhood. Ideally, the education plan helps strengthen citizens' skills to plan or act with the environment in mind. Goals of community-based environmental educa- tion are to: · Expand the community' s ability to improve environmental quality, · Integrate environmental management goals with other community devel- opment activities, Lead to actual environmental improvement, and Increase involvement of more community interests (both groups and points of view) in community environmental management activities. CBEE activities have four key qualities. Activities are community based, collaborative, information based, and action oriented. The choice and sequence of activities relies on community development strategies for determining envi- ronmental goals;6 a modified action research process for identifying information about the environmental problem and engaging stakeholders in the development of that information base;7 and a combination of communication, environmental education, innovation diffusion, and social marketing to involve the broader pub- lic or "community of interest" in carrying out selected goals. Details of each of the elements are provided in Box 10-1. EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION Applying a community-based approach is both an art and a science. The art is in the educator's ability to notice and take advantage of community links and opportunities. The science involves applying skills needed for working with a coalition or group. How the approach is applied depends on the characteristics of the community and of the groups or agencies involved. Consider, for example, the activities at the Sea Change Resource Center, a community-based organization in Philadelphia.8 Challenged by urban problems, Penn State Extension educators could have tried to improve the local economy by offering their own education program. Instead, educators worked in collabora- tion with Sea Change, which works to enhance economic development in selected Philadelphia neighborhoods by developing entrepreneurial solutions to local environmental problems. Sea Change activities are effective because they are well connected to neighborhood and city political structures. In the Sea Change/ Penn State Extension partnership, Sea Change identifies training needs for local groups in consultation with Penn State, and invites Penn State specialists, such as horticulture and urban forestry professionals, to provide technical assistance and training. Penn State has the potential to make a real difference in people's
166 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION lives due to adaptation of resources to meet community needs, and can deliver programs as part of a well-established and respected community organization. In the CBEE model, leadership is not a fixed status, but involves roles that shift back and forth over time. The educator is both working with the instigator and is influenced by the instigator's efforts. Education activities range from providing training in group process and planning, to providing information and resources for investigating the environmental problem. With this foundation, the
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 167 leadership group, along with additional members of the affected public or inter- est group, then engage in problem investigation and planning. A case in point is the story of the Horicon Marsh Area Coalition (HMAC). Horicon Marsh is the largest freshwater cattail marsh in the United States and is a designated wetland of international importance (Thoms and Andrews, 2000~. Recognizing the diversity of potentially conflicting interests and the increasing demand on the marsh and its surrounding areas, a local conservation group be-
168 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION gan thinking about how to protect the marsh before any major conflicts arose. Eventually the group contacted the University of Wisconsin Extension in Dodge County (i.e., a local outreach office) for assistance. Together, they planned a one-day Horicon Marsh Forum, convened and facilitated by the extension educa- tor. This forum attracted 80 people representing 23 interest groups. Using group facilitation processes, the group identified eight priority issues. Work groups formed around each issue. Forum organizers and a representative from each work group convened a steering committee, the HMAC, including representatives from diverse stake- holders, local government, and agencies. This group agreed to a set of "Organi- zational Principles, Policies, and Guidelines" based on a collaborative approach introduced by the extension educator. As HMAC continued to meet, the county extension educator introduced new process skills based on what participants were interested in learning. Experts from the university and other agencies occasionally provided content information and shared analytical skills when asked to explain research findings. The CBEE model emphasizes qualities of equity, empowerment, and sus- tainability as part of environmental management decision processes. Case stud- ies also indicate that while each of the four elements of the CBEE model are significant, the dynamic or interplay of CBEE elements is as important as suc- cessful implementation of any one element. Box 10-2 summarizes four other models that integrate education with community planning and have similar goals. THE CBEE MODEL AND RELATED APPROACHES CBEE integrates information dissemination, traditional education, participa- tory decision making, and other tools used in communication/diffusion approach- es. We call this community-based model an education model for several reasons. First, CBEE's community context and process approach exemplifies the ideal application of learning theory, which maintains that individuals are not motivated to learn unless the information is relevant to their lives and they have a sense of control about the learning process (Carlson and Maxa, 1997; Heimlich and Norland, 1984~. The CBEE model also provides educators with guidelines for developing education activities that are relevant to society' s needs, and it provides a context for quality education practices because it requires higher order learning skills and integrates education into real-life experiences (Bloom, 1956; Horton and Hutchinson, 1997; Joplin, 1995; Knox, 1993; Westwater and Wolfe, 2000~. Education relies on the existence of a body of knowledge, but its power is in the fact that the knowledge is not only transferred to the individual, but is instru- mental in transforming the individual. For education to take place, the individual has to actively receive the knowledge and know what to do with it (Bloom, 1956; Whitehead, 1929; Weintraub, 1995~. The educator's job is to provide the education in a way or at a time when the individual is receptive and to assure that
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 169
170 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION the individual knows what to do with specific knowledge. That is, "the individ- ual can find appropriate information and techniques in his previous experience to bring to bear on new problems and situations. This requires some analysis or understanding of the new situation; it requires a background of knowledge or methods which can be readily utilized; and it also requires some facility in dis- cerning the appropriate relations between previous experience and the new situa- tion" (Bloom, 1956:38~. Environmental education integrates basic learning skills with innovation dif- fusion approaches to create an education process focused on natural and socio- cultural environments. The four themes of environmental education literacy have been incorporated into the CBEE model. They are (1) knowledge of environ- mental processes and systems; (2) questioning and analysis skills; (3) skills for understanding and addressing environmental issues; and (4) personal and civic responsibility (Simmons et al., 1999~. An education program, if it is going to accomplish transformation, or even if it is merely to result in the adoption of a target behavior, must include communi- cation, skill development, and application. The CBEE model stresses the impor- tance of a careful match between the person who will learn and the choice of education process. For practical purposes, it is less important to clearly distin- guish among communication, diffusion, social marketing, and education con- cepts than it is to identify how to use each to create sustainable processes for supporting voluntary measures in environmental protection. Education programs developed based on the CBEE model rely, primarily, on informal learning learning through activities that occur outside formal edu- cational settings and that are characterized as voluntary, as opposed to required for school credit. Just as in formal education, however, informal learning experi- ences can be structured to meet a stated set of objectives and can be designed to influence attitudes, convey information, and/or change behavior (Crane et al., 1994~. CBEE activities may also be supported by formal education opportuni- ties. For example, drinking water quality described by the Consumer Confidence Reports found in homeowner water bills might be studied in the high school chemistry class. Informal learning may include any of the information and diffusion strate- gies discussed in Chapters 3 through 7 of this volume. For example: · Information dissemination and communication efforts use various me- dia to provide information to specific target audiences or to the public. Effectiveness of information campaigns has been studied relative to a vari- ety of audiences and purposes (see Chapters 3-7 and 12 of this volume). Behavior change efforts involve teaching an ideal behavior or an environ- mental practice (a series of several related behaviors that, together, could affect the environmental problem, Booth, 1996~. An ideal behavior or prac- tice is usually defined by experts. Behavior change efforts also may in- .
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE . 171 volve encouragement for personal commitment, use of external prompts, and changing social norms (McKenzie-Mohr, 1996; Stern, 2000~. Diffusion approaches emphasize the spread of innovations by communi- cation among the members of a social system. In diffusion theory, inno- vators, diffusers, and potential adopters communicate to understand the innovation; how and why it works; and what its advantages, disadvantag- es, and consequences are in specific situations. Research about innova- tion diffusion usually refers to how citizens adopt new technology, but the concepts can apply equally to new information (Rogers, 1995~. There is extensive research about techniques used in informal and adult education and with public participation. Educators can learn numerous details about effectiveness of workshops, types of signs to use, visitor attention span, benefits of linking television programs with local support groups, and other in- formation. For example, see studies summarized in Crane et al. (1994), Chess and Purcell (1999), and the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors (1986~. Our challenge is to figure out how to use communication, diffusion, and education strategies to infuse environmental management considerations into the mix of everyday discussion and decision making. The CBEE model provides numerous avenues to use these strategies for increasing environmental manage- ment capacity among many audiences. EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CBEE MODEL There is a rich set of resources about what makes community-based involve- ment and outreach effective too many resources to describe here, except in the most general sense. Details have been captured in the CBEE Model (see Box 10- 1~. Yet across this wide variety of publications, there is a consistent emphasis on application of community development techniques to solving community prob- lems. In itself, this commonality of theme indicates something about the value of this approach. Finding definitive research about the effectiveness of the CBEE elements when applied to environmental management, however, was difficult. It was easy to identify guides, literature reviews, and descriptive materials, but difficult to find information that summarizes impacts of specific program strategies. Re- ports and newsletter articles provide periodic summaries for some community- based programs, such as Farm*A*Syst (Jackson, 1990), Groundwater Guardian (Kreifels, 1997), the River Network (Wallin and Haberman, 1992), and Save Our Streams (Firehock, 1994~. Otherwise, impact information is available pri- marily through a small number of studies of individual local programs or studies of program elements. Some reports involve collecting and summarizing case studies and high- lighting commonalities. These studies attempt to build theories of community-
72 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION based efforts or to provide a list of keys to success. Some were useful in building the CBEE model. These studies of groups of cases include studies of: 9 (out of 618) federally funded watershed-based projects (U.S. General Accounting Of- fice, 1995~; 30 community-based managementinitiatives (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997~; various watershed management plans and related ed- ucation initiatives (ricks, 1997~; 5 river case studies (Wallin and Haberman, 1992~; annual summaries of state progress in adapting Farm*A*Syst resources for local outreach education needs (Jackson et al., 1997~; case analysis of public involvement through Great Lakes Remedial Action Plan citizen advisory com- mittees (Landre and Knuth, 1993~; surveys of Rouge River neighborhood pro- grams (Powell et al., 2000~; stormwater pollution case studies (Aponte Clarke et al., 2000~; investigation of impacts from a homeowner nutrient management program; and local management of "common-pool" resources (for example, Os- trom, 1990; Singh and Ballabh, 1994~. In addition, there are major text books and literature reviews based on ex- amination of the mainly case-based literatures about public involvement and collaboration in natural resources management (MacKenzie, 1996; National Re- search Council, 1999; Renn et al., 1995a; Wondolleck and Yaffee, 2000~. IMPLICATIONS OF CBEE FINDINGS CBEE could be described as a process of changing the community's idea of acceptable environmental management behavior, as a result of direct involve- ment of citizens in the management process. In spite of the difficulty of describ- ing and studying such a complex process, this participatory, engaged approach provides a community involvement and outreach model that can be responsive to political as well as ecological necessity. For example, studies show that the new science of ecosystem-based management depends on application of community development problem-solving processes, as described by the CBEE model (Kellogg, 1999; MacKenzie, 1996; Wondolleck and Yaffee, 2000; National Re- search Council, 1999~. Community interests work together to find and implement solutions to com- mon problems. The question is how and when to apply the CBEE model to address environmental protection needs. When is education an important ele- ment of environmental decision making? What types of education needs are best supported through this model? Who are the people who can assure that this complicated process can be carried out? How can the effectiveness of the pro- cess be evaluated? How can it be applied to larger scale problems? Some of these questions will be answered as researchers study how citizen participation models9 or development of social infrastructures required to man- age common-pool resources could be applied in the CBEE model. (Common- pool resources usually refer to an economic resource, such as animal grazing land, which is collectively owned by an identifiable community.) For example,
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 173 more discussion is needed about the role of education in managing common- pool resources and how findings apply to their social uses (health, well-being, beauty, recreation). The role of education seems clear. At a minimum, it is important to help people develop the capacity to make decisions and take responsibility (Horton and Freire, 1990; Ostrom, 1994~. In managing common-pool resources, users need knowledge of resource conservation and use to help in correct and timely diagnosis of problems and to assure they have the best knowledge they can have, because resource decisions are usually made based on "best available" knowl- edge (e.g., nutrient best management practices). Policymakers need education so they can understand the nature and causes of problems and the tools for manage- ment (Singh, 1994~. Public participation in policy development requires equal access to information (Lynn and Kartez, 1995; Dienel and Renn, 1995~. Com- munities need a source of leadership in environmental management (Kellogg, 1999), and natural resources are more likely to be managed sustainably when decision making is decentralized (Wondolleck and Yaffee, 2000~. The question of when to use the CBEE model refers to the type of decisions needed. If individual behaviors are the primary management elements, then ap- plication of CBEE can provide peer support and motivation, but if transfer of relevant information is the only goal, CBEEis only one of many workable ap- proaches. If a policy or infrastructure change is needed, then application of CBEE is one of few ways to accomplish the goal sustainably. Who can assure that the CBEE model is properly applied is a very signifi- cant question; its answer also helps to answer the question of how CBEE could apply to larger scale problems. Government can enhance the skills of its own staff and ensure that policies provide the time and perspective necessary for community flexibility and responsiveness to environmental issues. Institutions that provide community outreach also can assure that educators build skills for facilitating or supporting different steps of the CBEE model. Leaders of com- munity organizations can commit to supporting the comprehensive CBEE process. In CBEE, government agency personnel, in particular, need to commit to authentic efforts with communities. Citizen advisory committee studies show, for example, that success depends on the citizen perception that the underlying purpose of the sponsoring institution is sincere and legitimate (Lynn and Kartez, 1995; MacKenzie, 1996~. Goals must be established through genuine collabora- tion and with all participants committing to them even when they differ from the initial ideas, plans, or missions of some participants. Application of the CBEE model also depends on availability of resources that enable communities to re- spond effectively, and on agency personnel who are ready to support community assumption of responsibility. Remedial Action Plans (RAP) for the Great Lakes ecosystem, and ecosys- tem-based water resource management schemes in several areas, serve as tests
74 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION for how to apply the CBEE process while addressing larger scale problems. RAPs were mandated by the federal government but were written by state and local governments with input from citizens, business, and industry (Renn, 1991~. Centralizing goals, but not mechanisms, provides an opportunity for maximizing success at the local level through application of the CBEE model. Several authors have suggested that a collaborative, sequential, or "nested" administrative structure, such as that found in the RAP process, is needed to enhance successful implementation of public participation in larger scale prob- lems (Born and Genskow, 2001; National Research Council, 1999; Ostrom, 1990; Renn and Finson, 1991~. For example, a study of watershed strategies found that organizations for watershed management are most likely to be effective if their structure matches the scale of the problem (National Research Council, 1999~. In this example, local issues are handled by local self-organized watershed coun- cils, where the CBEE process could be applied, while larger organizations should deal with broader issues. Other examples where CBEE could be effective in the application of a verti- cal decision-making strategy include an effort like the Dutch government's ini- tiative to develop a national policy on energy (Midden, 1995) and efforts to improve effectiveness of Citizen Advisory Committees (CACs). CAC impacts could be increased by combining their activities with techniques providing more representation, such as surveys or referenda (Vari, 1995) or the CBEE approach. Finally, evaluation tools have been developed to help practitioners deter- mine whether their community-based education efforts have been effective or applied appropriately. It' s one thing to provide a citizen education or participa- tion model, but another to know whether its application accomplished the goal of increased citizen ownership for the product. Questionnaires can help practitio- ners evaluate community involvement for competence and fairness (Renn et al., 1995b) or for appropriate choice of steps toward the involvement process (Uni- versity of Wisconsin Extension, 1998~. CONCLUSION When educators, business/industry administrators, politicians, or govern- ment agency representatives suggest public education as one way to meet an environmental management goal, the education strategy must go beyond sim- plistic solutions to be effective. The usual suggestions hold a meeting, write a manual, develop a curriculum, provide training will not support long-term or structural change on their own. Coupling these standard education resources with the CBEE process sets the stage for meaningful education; that is, educa- tion designed to provide the context and relevance recognized by the learner and to generate the opportunity for the learner to apply knowledge to the environ- mental problem. If CBEE's collaborative and participatory processes are complemented by
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 175 an authentic commitment to participate in and use its key qualities of being community based, collaborative, information based, and action onented, we can achieve community flexibility and responsiveness to environmental issues. Fur- ther study of the elements of community-based education and representative programs would enhance our ability to determine when CBEE should be empha- sized and how to train and support practitioners to facilitate successful participa- tion in this dynamic process. NOTES 1 A "community of interest" is that form of community whose commonality lies in the benefits received from a resource or the costs imposed on it (Wondolleck and Yaffee, 2000). 2 A 1996-98 project investigated ways to strengthen partnerships among the USDA Coopera- tive Extension, EPA, and communities in the service of these environmental management and educa- tion efforts. The Steering Committee included representatives from two EPA regions (Region 3, Philadelphia, and Region 10, Seattle) and the University of Wisconsin Project staff. More informa- tion is available online at http://www.reeusda.gov/nre/figs/usdaepa.pdf or http://www.wisc.edu/erc/. 3 Based on steering committee recommendations, project staff reviewed published case stud- ies, U.S. EPA and USDA agency activities, and exemplary local programs that considered the whole community (i.e., programs which linked environmental education to management of local ecosystem components and community sustainability goals as defined by the President's Council on Sustainable Development ). Staff also identified literature reviews, monographs, manuals, conference pro- ceedings, and studies that provided further information about community development models, so- cial marketing experiences, outstanding models of community-based education (as identified by peers), and community-based environmental education strategies. In addition to community develop- ment references, cited by Wise (1998), published references that influenced development of the model included Andrews et al. (1995), Andrews et al. (1996), Ayres et al. (1990), Beckenstein et al. (1996), Berger and Corbin (1992), Booth (1996), Butler et al. (1995), Byers (1996), Cairn et al. (1996), Chavis and Paul (1990), Cole-Misch et al. (1996), De Young (1993), Domack (1995), Dro- han et al. (1997), Dwyer et al. (1993), Environmental Defense Fund Pollution Prevention Alliance Staff (1996), Ficks (1997), Firehock (1994), Fishbein and Gelb (1992), Flora (1997), Gigliotti (1990), Harker and Natter (1995), Himmelman (1992), Howe and Disinger (1988), Hungerford and yolk (1990), Hustedde et al. (1984), Israel and Ilvento (1996), Jackson et al. (1990), Jansen (1995), Johnson et al. (1996), Kreifels (1997), Kretzman and McKnight (1993), Lewis et al. (1993), McKen- zie-Mohr (1996), National Association of Service and Conservation Corps (1996), Nuzum (1996), Olden and Poje (1996), Rocha (1997), Rogers (1995), Rusky and Wilke (1996), Sargent et al. (1991), Selin and Chavez (1995), Sexton (1996), Sidel et al. (1996), Sorenson (1985), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1997), U.S. General Accounting Office (1995), Walzer et al. (1995), Wallin and Haberman (1992), Wise and Kenworthy (1993). 4 As explained in the introduction, community refers to the topic or situation under discussion. Community of interest is a useful characterization because community, as used here, implies more than merely a physical place, although it can and often does include a geographic element. It may reference a discrete collection of persons who have a common interest, yet they may be located in different places and may not be aware of their shared interest. The community of interest also need not be made up of similar perspectives. Indeed, often it is made up of diverse perspectives surround- ing a common issue (Wise, 1998). 5 Although this definition was developed by the EPA/USDA Partnership (Andrews, 1998), it has its origins in several other traditions, that are closely related to each other. Knox (1993) describes community problem-solving education as education that aims at community and organizational de-
176 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION velopment and social change, in contrast to traditional education, which is aimed at development and change of the individual. Based on this extensive study of national and international programs, Knox defines this type of education as "the process and result of an effort to include a broad cross section of people in educational activities to enable them to work together to solve organizational or commu- nity problems that have usually entailed consciousness raising, empowerment, and structural trans- formation." John Dewey, Myles Horton, and Paulo Freire are leaders in this tradition. Knox cites examples that include citizenship schools, county board workshops, participatory literacy, and work- place programs. 6 The purpose of community development is to satisfy local needs and welfare of people. Empowerment is emphasized as a means of identifying issues, managing change, and facilitating community-based solutions. Community development has been described as having four parts: a process moving by stages from one condition to the next; a method, a way of working toward the attainment of a goal; a program, whereby if activities are carried out, goals will be accomplished; and a movement, a cause to which people become committed. Emphasis is on what happens to people, and accomplishing a goal through activities and inciting people to take action (Wise, 1998). 7 Action research involves the student in generating new information to improve understanding of how knowledge content is developed, using critical thinking skills, and creating a sense of owner- ship of the knowledge. Action research has been used extensively in training and development in corporations, and in adult education in environmental, agricultural, and health settings (Quigley, 1997). 8 Information was obtained through personal communication with Roz Johnson, Director, Sea Change Resource Center, as part of the EPA/USDA community-based education investigation (An- drews, 1998). 9 Citizen participation models include citizen advisory committees, citizen panels (also known as planning cells), citizen juries, citizen initiatives, negotiated rule making, mediation, compensation and benefit sharing, and Dutch study groups (Renn et al., 1995a). 10 See Indiana University's materials for the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis for an extensive bibliography of studies and research about common-pool resources (Hess, 1996). For a recent summary of the field, see National Research Council (2002). REFERENCES Andrews, E. 1998 An EPA/USDA Partnership to Support Community-Based Education.910-R-98-008. [On- line]. Available: http://www.reeusda.gov/nre/gifs/usdaepa.pdf [Accessed April 2000]. Andrews, E., E. Farrell, J. Heimlich, R. Ponzio, and K. Warren 1995 Educating Young People About Water - A Guide to Program Planning and Evaluation. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Educa- tion, The Ohio State University. Andrews, E., J. Hawthorne, and K. Pickering 1996 Watershed Education - Goals and Strategies for Training, Communication, and Partner- ships. Watershed '96 Pre-conference Symposium. National Fish and Wildlife Founda- tion. Baltimore, MD, June. Aponte Clarke, G.P., P.H. Lehner, D.M. Cameron, and A.G. Frank 2000 Community responses to stormwater pollution: Case study findings with examples from the Midwest. Pp. 124-131 in Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Water Resource Management and Protection. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Ayres, J., R. Cole, C. Hein, S. Huntington, W. Kobberdahl, W. Leonard, and D. Zetocha 1990 Take Charge: Economic Development in Small Communities. North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Ames: Iowa State University.
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 177 Beckenstein, A.R., F. Long, T. Gladwin, B. Marcus, and the Management Institute for Environment and Business 1996 Stakeholder Negotiations: Exercises in Sustainable Development. Chicago, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Berger, I.E., and R.M. Corbin 1992 Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 11(2):79-89. Bloom, B.S., ed. 1956 Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: Dav- id McKay Company. Booth, E.M. 1996 Starting with BehaviorA Participatory Process for Selecting Target Behaviors in En- vironmental Programs. Washington, DC: GreenCOM, Academy for Educational De- velopment. Born, S.M., and K.D. Genskow 2001 Toward Understanding New Watershed Initiatives: A Report from the Madison Water- shed Workshop. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison. [Online]. Available: http:/ /www.tu.org/newsstand/library_pdfs/watershed.pdf [Accessed February 19, 2002]. Butler, L.M., C. Dephelps, and K. Gray 1995 Community Ventures: Partnerships in Education and Research Circular Series. Pull- man: Western Regional Extension Publications, Washington State University. Byers, B.A. 1996 Understanding and Influencing Behaviors in Conservation and Natural Resources Man- agement. African Biodiversity Series, No. 4. Washington, DC: Biodiversity Support Program (U.S. Agency for International Development-funded consortium of World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, and World Resources Institute). Cairn, E. Row, and E. Andrews Give Water A Hand - Action Guide. Environmental Resources Center. Madison: Uni- versity of Wisconsin. [Online]. Available: http://wwwl.uwex.edu/ces/erc/gwah/ gwahform.cfm [Accessed March 6, 2002]. Carlson, S., and S. Maxa 1997 Science Guidelines for Nonformal Education. Center for 4-H Youth Development, Col- lege of Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota. Summarized from Bartlett, F.C. (1932), Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychol- ogy. London: Cambridge University Press. Chavis, D.M., and F. Paul 1990 Community Development, Community Participation, and Substance Abuse Prevention: Rationale, Concepts and Mechanisms. Santa Clara, CA: Department of Health, County of Santa Clara. Chess, C., and K. Purcell 1999 Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works? Environmental Science and Technology 33(16):2685-2692. Cole-Misch, S., L. Price, and D. Schmidt 1996 Sourcebook for Watershed Education. Arlington, VA: Global Rivers Environmental Education Network at Earth Force. Crane, V., M. Chen, S. Bitgood, B. Serrell, D. Thompson, H. Nicholson, F. Weiss, and P. Campbell 1994 Informal Science Learning: What the Research Says About Television, Science Muse- ums, and Community-Based Projects. Dedham, MA: Research Communications, Ltd. De Young, R. 1993 Changing behavior and making it stick: The conceptualization and management of con- servation behavior. Environment and Behavior 25(4):485-505. Cairn, R., S. 1996
178 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION Dienel, P.C., and O. Renn 1995 Planning cells: A gate to "fractal" mediation. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, eds. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Domack, D.R. 1995 Creating a Vision for Your Community. Madison: University of Wisconsin Extension - Cooperative Extension (G3617). Drohan, J., C. Abdalla, B. Marshall, and E. Stevens 1997 Lessons from Successful Project Leaders. 1996 conference summary. Pennsylvania Groundwater Policy Education Project. State College: Pennsylvania State University Cooperative Extension and the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania. Dwyer, W.O., F.C. Leeming, M.K. Cobern, B.E. Porter, and J.M. Jackson 1993 Critical review of behavioral interventions to preserve the environment: Research since 1980. Environment and Behavior 25(3):275-321. Environmental Defense Fund Pollution Prevention Alliance Staff 1996 Environmental Sustainability Kit. Washington, DC: Environmental Defense Fund. Ficks, B. 1997 Top 10 Watershed Lessons Learned. Office of Water and Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. EPA840-F-97-001. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Firehock, K. 1994 Save Our StreamsVolunteer Trainer's Handbook. Gaithersburg, MD: Izaak Walton League of America. Fishbein, B., and C. Gelb 1992 Making Less GarbageA Planning Guide for Communities. New York: INFORM. Flora, C.B. 1997 Innovations in community development. Rural Development News 21(3): 1-3,12. Gigliotti, L.M. 1990 Environmental education: What went wrong? What can be done? Journal of Environ- mental Education 22(1):9-12. Harker, D., and E. Natter 1995 Where We Live - A Citizen's Guide to Conducting a Community Environmental Inven- tory. Washington, DC: Island Press. Heimlich, J.E., and E. Norland 1984 Developing Teaching Style in Adult Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Hess, C. 1996 Common Pool Resources and Collective Action: A Bibliography (v. 3). Bloomington: Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University. Himmelman, A.T. 1992 Communities Working Collaboratively for a Change. Monograph, 1996 revised ea., IA No. 4. Minneapolis, MN: Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota. Horton, M., and P. Freire 1990 We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Education and Social Change. B. Bell, J. Gaventa, and J. Peters, eds. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Horton, R.L., and S. Hutchinson 1997 Nurturing Scientific Literacy Among Youth Through Experientially Based Curriculum Materials. Center for 4-H Youth Development, College of Food, Agricultural and Envi- ronmental Sciences. Columbus: The Ohio State University. Howe, R.W., and J. Disinger 1988 Environmental education that makes a difference Knowledge to behavior changes. ERIC/SMEAC Environmental Education Digest ED320761(4): 1-5. [Online]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed320761.html [Accessed March 6, 2002].
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE Hungerford, H.R., and T.L. yolk 179 1990 Changing learner behavior through environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education 21(3):8-21. Hustedde, R., R. Shaffer, and G. Pulver 1984 Community Economic Analysis: A How To Manual. The North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Ames: Iowa State University. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, International Development Research Centre, United Nations Environment Program 1996 The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide. Toronto: Local Agenda 21 Initiative. Israel, G.D., and T. Ilvento 1996 Building a Foundation for Community Leadership, Involving Youth in Community De- velopment Projects. Mississippi State, MS: Southern Rural Development Center. Jackson, G. 1990 Farm*A*Syst, Farmstead Assessment System. Adapted by states throughout the de- cade. Available from state Cooperative Extension offices. Madison: University of Wis- consin - Extension. [Online]. Available: http://www.uwex.edu/farmasyst [Accessed March 6, 2002]. Jackson, G., and Farm*A*Syst/Home*A*Syst Staff 1997 National Directory - Farm*A*Syst/Home*A*Syst. Madison: University of Wisconsin at Madison, Environmental Resources Center. Jansen, L. 1995 Citizen activism in the foundations of adult environmental education in the United States. Convergence 28(4):89-97. Johnson, A.W., J.R. Denworth, and D.R. Trotzer 1996 The EAC Handbook - A Guide for Pennsylvania's Municipal Environmental Advisory Councils. Phiadelphia: Pennsylvania Environmental Council. Joplin, L. 1995 On defining experiential education. In The Theory of Experiential Education, K. War- ren, M. Sakofs and J.S. Hunt, Jr., eds. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co. Kellogg, W.A. 1999 Community-based organizations and neighborhood environmental problem solving: A framework for adoption of information technologies. Journal of Environmental Plan- ning and Management 42(4):445-469. Knox, A. 1993 Strengthening Adult and Continuing Education: A Global Perspective on Synergistic Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kreifels, C., ed. 1997 A Community Guide to Groundwater Guardian. Lincoln, NE: The Groundwater Foun- dation. Kretzman, J., and J. McKnight 1993 Building Communities From the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing A Community's Assets. Chicago: ACTA Publications. Landre, B., and B. Knuth 1993 Success of citizen advisory committees in consensus-based water resources public in- volvement programs. Society and Natural Resources 6:229-257. Lewis, S.J. 1993 The Good Neighbor Handbook: A Community-Based Strategy for Sustainable Industry. 2nd. ed. Waverly, MA: The Good Neighbor Project for Sustainable Industries. Lynn, F.M., and J.D. Kartez 1995 The redemption of Citizen Advisory Committees: A perspective from critical theory. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiede- mann, eds. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
180 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION MacKenzie, S.H. 1996 Integrated Resource Planning and Management. Washington, DC: Island Press. McKenzie-Mohr, D. 1996 Promoting a Sustainable Future: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Market- ing. Ottawa, Ontario, Can.: National Round Table on the Environment and the Econo- my. Midden, C. 1995 Direct participation in macro-issues: A multiple group approach. An analysis and cri- tique of the Dutch national debate on energy policy, fairness, competence, and beyond. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, eds. Boston: Kluwer Academic. National Association of Service and Conservation Corps 1996 Tools for Environmental Service: An Inventory of Project and Environmental Educa- tion Resources for Conservation and Service Corps and Other Stewards of the Earth. Washington, DC: National Association of Service and Conservation Corps. National Research Council 1999 New Strategies for America's Watersheds. Committee on Watershed Management. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 2002 The Drama of the Commons. Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change. E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P.C. Stern, S. Stonich, and E. U. Weber, eds. Washing- ton, DC: National Academy Press. Nuzum, R. 1996 Know Your Watershed Program. Conservation Technology Information Center. [On- line]. Available: http://www.ctic.purdue.edu [Accessed March 6, 2002]. Olden, K., and G. Poje 1996 The emergence of environmental justice as a national issue. Health & Environment Digest 9(9):77-79. Ostrom, E. 1990 Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cam- bridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. 1994 Covenants, Collective Action, and Common-Pool Resources. Workshop in Political The- ory and Policy Analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University. Powell, J., Z. Ball, and K. Reaume 2000 Public involvement programs that support water quality management. Pp. 214-221 in Proceedings of the Conference on Tools for Urban Water Resource Management and Protection. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. President's Commission on Americans Outdoors 1986 A Literature Review. Washington, DC: President's Commission on Americans Out- doors. President's Council on Sustainable Development 1996 Sustainable America: A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Of lice. Quigley, B.A. 1997 The role of research in the practice of adult education. In Creating Practical Knowledge Through Action Research: Posing Problems, Solving Problems, and Improving Daily Practice, B.A. Quigley and G.W. Kuhne, eds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Renn, O., and R. Finson 1991 The Great Lakes Clean-up Program: A Role Model for International Cooperation? Florence: European University Institute.
ELAINE ANDREWS, MARK STEVENS, AND GREG WISE 18 Renn, O., T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann 1995a Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. Boston: Kluwer Academic. 1995b The pursuit of fair and competent citizen participation. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, eds. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Rocha, E.M. 1997 A ladder of empowerment. Journal of Planning Education and Research 17:31-44. Rogers, E.M. 1995 Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed. New York: Free Press. Ruskey, A., and R. Wilke 1996 Promoting Environmental Education: An Action Handbook for Strengthening EE in Your State and Community. National Environmental Education Advancement Project (NEEAP). Stevens Point: University of Wisconsin. Sargent, F.E.O., P. Lusk, J.A. Rivera, and M. Varela 1991 Rural Environmental Planningfor Sustainable Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Selin, S., and D. Chavez 1995 Developing a collaborative model for environmental planning and management. Envi- ronmental Management 19(2): 189-195. Sexton, K. 1996 Environmental justice: Are pollution risks higher for disadvantaged communities? Health & Environment Digest 9(9):73-77. Sidel, V., B. Levy, B. Johnson 1996 Environmental injustice: What must be done? Health & Environment Digest 9(9):79- 89. Simmons, D., et al. 1999 Excellence in Environmental Education-Guidelines for Learning (K-12). Rock Spring, GA: North American Association for Environmental Education. Singh, K., and V. Ballabh 1994 Role of Leadership in Cooperative Management of Natural Common Pool Resources: A Collective Goods Theoretic Perspective. Working Paper No. 50. Anand, Gujurat, India: Institute of Rural Management. Sorenson, D. 1985 Organizing an information program for nonpoint pollution control. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 40(1):82-83. Stern, P.C. 2000 Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues 56(3):407-424. Thoms, C., and E. Andrews 2000 Building Capacity, Community-Based Environmental Education in Practice. In US En- vironmental Protection Agency/Cooperative Extension Partnerships, No. 8. [Online]. Available: http://www.uwex.edu/erc/pdf/EPA8.pdf [Accessed: March 6, 2002]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1997 Community-Based Environmental Protection: A Resource Book for Protecting Ecosys- tems and Communities. EPA 230-B-96-003. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. U.S. General Accounting Office 1995 Agriculture and the Environment: Information on and Characteristics of Selected Water- shed Projects. Report to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, U.S. Senate. GAO/RCED-95-218. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office.
182 A MODEL OF COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION University of Wisconsin Extension 1998 Community Group Member Survey G3658-9 and Evaluating Collaboratives: Reaching the Potential, G3658-8. Madison, WI: Cooperative Extension Publications. Vari, A. 1995 Citizens' Advisory Committee as a model for public participation: A multiple-criteria evaluation. In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, eds. Boston: Kluwer Academic. Wallin, P., and R. Haberman 1992 People Protecting Rivers: A Collection of Lessons from Successful Grassroots Activists. Portland, OR: River Network. Walzer, N., S.C. Deller, H. Fossum, G. Green, J. Fruidl, S. Johnson, S. Kline, and D. Patton 1995 Community Visioning/Strategic Planning Programs: State of the Art. Ames: Iowa State University, North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Weintraub, B.A. 1995 Defining a fulfilling and relevant environmental education. Urban Education 30(3):337- 366. Westwater, A., and P. Wolfe 2000 The brain-compatible curriculum. Educational Leadership - The Science of Learning 58(3):49-52. Whitehead, A.N. 1929 The Aims of Education. New York: New American Library. Wise, G. 1998 Applying U.S. community development process lessons. Appendix A in An EPA/USDA Partnership to Support Community-Based Education. 910-R-98-008. Unpublished manuscript. University of Wisconsin Environmental Resources Center, Madison. Wise, M., and L. Kenworthy 1993 Preventing Industrial Toxic Hazards - A Guide for Communities. New York: INFORM. Wondolleck, J.M., and S.L. Yaffee 2000 Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Manage- ment. Washington, DC: Island Press.