ya / Kano, Nigeria / Khomas-Erongo, Namibia / Kwaulu Natal, South Africa / Lagos, Nigeria / Lesotho /akana & Rural Eastern Cape, South Africa / Maputo,ozambique / Mau Ecosystem Complex, Kenya / Mina, Nigeria / Senegal / Swaziland / Zomba, Malawi /ogotá, Colombia / British Columbia (North Cascades),anada / Chaco, Argentina / Curitiba-Parana, Brazil /rand Rapids, USA / Greater Sudbury, Canada / Guamala / Lima-Callao, Peru / Montreal, Canada / Northexas, USA / Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / São Paulo, Brazil
Saskatchewan, Canada / Tantramar, Canada / Toroo, Canada / Western Jalisco, Mexico / Anji, China /runachal Pradesh, India / Bangalore, India / Beijing,hina / Bogor, Indonesia / Bohol, Philippines / Cebu,
hilippines / Cha-am, Thailand / Chandigarh, India /hubu, Japan / Delhi, India / East Kalimantan, Indonea / Gippsland, Australia / Goa, India / Greater Dhaka,angladesh / Greater Phnom Penh, Cambodia / Grear Sendai, Japan / Greater Western Sydney, Australia /uwahati, India / Hyogo-Kobe, Japan / Ilocos, Philippies / Incheon, Republic of Korea / Kitakyushu, Japan /odagu, India / Kyrgyzstan / Lucknow, India / Mumbai,
dia / Northern Mindanao, Philippines / Okayama, Jaan / Pacific Island Countries / Penang, Malaysia / Pune,
dia / Editors:
Shangri-la, China / Southern Vietnam / Srinagar,
Fadeeva
dia / Zinaida
Tongyeong,Republic of Korea / Trang, Thailand
Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana
Ulju, Mario
Republic
Tabucanonof Korea / Western Australia / YogyaKiran Banga Chhokararta, Indonesia/ Yokohama, Japan / Açores, Portugal
Barcelona, Spain / Central Macedonia, Greece / Crei-

Building a Resilient 
Future through Multistakeholder 
Learning and Action: 
Ten Years of Regional
Centres of Expertise on
Education for Sustainable
Development

2This publication should be cited as:
Building a Resilient Future through Multistakeholder
Learning and Action: Ten Years of Regional Centresof Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development
Editing and coordination:
Anna Dirksen
Design, layout and photos: (except where otherwise noted).
Martin Brombacher. martinbrombacher.de© UNU-IAS 2014
Published by:United Nations University Institute for the
Advanced Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS)
5-53-70 Jingumae
Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150-8925
Japan
The views expressed in this publication are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofUnited Nations University

3

Table of Content
4
6
8
16

Preface
RCEs Around the World
Forewords
RCE Tongyeong Declaration

18

Part I
Introduction

20

Chapter 1
Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for
Sustainable Development: Evolution of Concept
and Practices

180
182

Part III
Introduction
Chapter 8 		Contribution of RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD

Chapter 9
The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects
for RCEs Post-2014
		
238 Chapter 10
Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral
Learning Partnerships
206

48

Part II
Introduction

50

Chapter 2
Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder
Partnerships and Sustainable Development 74

Chapter 3
Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity
within RCEs

98

Chapter 4 		Learning and Innovation for Greener andSocially Just Societies

128

Chapter 5
ESD and the Framing of Transformative
Social Learning in RCEs

142

Chapter 6
Influencing Development and Implementationof SD and ESD Policies, Programs and Projects:
Role of RCEs

160

Chapter 7
Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation
Practices in RCEs

256
260
266

Reflections: Stephanie Hodge
Reflections: Dzukifli Abdul Razak
Reflections: Hans van Ginkel

274

Chapter 11
Looking Ahead

286
289

List of Contributors
List of Abbreviations

4

Preface

Message from the Editors
We dedicate this book to
global citizens sharing the values and eager to learn
the wisdom of networking in local communities
in searching for sustainable development solutions
and collectively, as inclusive constituent networks,
providing global learning spaces on education forsustainable development (ESD).

The global movement of Regional Centres of Expertise on ESD (RCEs), having reached a decade of existence and of constantly contributing to change
through learning and action, is deserving of a commemorative memento. As
the United Nations Decade on Education for Sustainable Development (DESD),
upon which the RCE movement was founded and to which it was dedicated,draws to a close, it is also a critical time to look towards the future of the RCEcommunity against the backdrop of the new processes taking shape in sustainable development and education.
This publication is the tale of an extraordinary grassroots movement conceived
at the turn of the century and dedicated to the proposition that unless local
stakeholders work together to find and implement local solutions to local sustainable development problems, all efforts to translate global sustainable development policy and vision into local realities might be in vain. By creating partnerships among groups and individuals as diverse as educators, researchers,
policymakers, scientists, youth, leaders within indigenous communities andthroughout the public, private and non-governmental sectors, RCEs are able
to provide a framework for strategic thinking and action on sustainability, creating tangible improvements in their communities and making multistakeholder partnerships the core of each individual RCE and of the global RCE
network.

5This book draws upon earlier analyses and publications as well as recent reflections of the RCEs showing the colourful diversity of organizational cultures andapproaches in promoting ESD worldwide. On the other hand, it renders possible
the identification of common tendencies and emerging qualities, despite the different cultural, social and economic contexts, target groups and action areas. A
variety of signs are mirrored by the RCEs from Asia-Pacific, Europe, Africa, and
the Americas. Authors from different organizations and RCEs across all continents prepared the articles and other contributions to this book, demonstrating
the interplay of unity and diversity in the global RCE network.
Work on the book has enabled the contributors to reflect on the past and, mostcritically, to chart new directions for the development of RCEs – as local networks, regional movements and an international force contributing to international sustainability processes.
All members of the Editorial Team have been connected with the RCE community for a significant amount of time, some from the very development of theRCE concept; it is thus a special pleasure and privilege for the team to be a partof the RCE journey. The Editorial Team is profoundly grateful to all who havemade this journey a success, especially those who have contributed to this commemorative book: members of the RCEs, members of the Ubuntu Committeeof Peers for the RCEs, UNU leadership, members of the UN Interagency
Committee for the DESD, regional advisors, and supporters in the regions
representing governments, international organizations, and others. We also
acknowledge the unwavering support of the excellent team at the Global RCE
Service Centre and the UNU-IAS community.
May this book be a part of the continuing, never-ending learning process inpursuit of sustainable development!
The Editorial Team
Zinaida Fadeeva
Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana
Mario Tabucanon
Kiran Banga Chhokar

6

RCEs around the world

Regional Centres of Expertise on Educationfor Sustainable Development

British Columbia(North Cascades)

Saskatchewan
Greater Sudbury
Grand Rapids
TorontoGreater Portland

Scotland North East
Yorkshire &East Midlan
Humberside
Denmark
Greater Manchester
DublinSevernLondonIrelandWales
QuebecSouthern North Sea
Ruhr
Tantramar
Rhine-Meuse
Brittany
Euroregion Tyrol
Montreal
Porto Metropolitan Area
Barcelona
Shenandoah
AçoresCreias-Oeste
ValleyNorth Texas
Western Jalisco
GuatemalaSenegalGhana

Bogotá

Kan
Min
Lagos
B
GreateMau Ecosy

Lima-Callao

Chaco

RCEs around the world

Rio de JaneiroSão Paulo
Curitiba-Paraná

There are 129 acknowledged RCEs as of April 2014

Khomas-Erongo

S

Makana andEastern Cap

7

North SwedenWest Sweden
nds
Espoo
Uppsalak
Nizhny NovgorodSkåneLithuania
SamaraHamburg
Oldenburger Münsterland
Nuremberg
MunichViennaGraz-Styria
Kyrgyzstan
Middle AlbaniaaCentral Macedonia
Crete

HohhotBeijing

IncheonEast Arunachal
Tongyeong
PradeshChangwon

Inje
Ulju

Greater Sendai
Chubu
Yokohama
Hyogo-Kobe
Okayama
Kitakyushu

SrinagarAnji
Guwahati Greater Shangri-la
Chandigarh
Delhi
Kunming
Mumbai Lucknow Greater
Pune
Dhaka Greater
IlocosGoa
Phnom Penh
Cebu
Cha-amno
KodaguSouthern
Bohol
nna
Bangalore
VietnamTrangs Greater Eastern Uganda
Northern Mindanao
Kakamega-Western Kenya
Buea
PenangNyanzaer Mbarara
East Kalimantan
Greater Nairobi
ystem Complex
Greater Pwani
Bogor
Greater Dar es Salaam
Yogyakarta
HarareLusaka
Zomba
Cairo

o

Swazilandd Ruralpe

JordanMutareMaputoLesotho
KwaZulu NatalWestern Australia

Pacific Island
Countries

Murray-DarlingGreater Western Sydney
Gippsland Victoria
Waikato8

Forewords

Five years have already passed since the United Nations University Institute for the

Advanced Study of Sustainability (formerly the United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies) brought forward lessons from the RCE community in the publication Five
Years of Regional Centres of Expertise on ESD. As the saying goes, “Time flies.” On thisoccasion, I would like to congratulate the institute for its successful compilation of the
publication Building a Resilient Future through Multistakeholder Learning and Action: Ten Yearsof Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development. I would also like totake this opportunity to express my heartfelt gratitude to those concerned for their 10 yearsof endeavours toward achieving the goals of the United Nations Decade of Education for
Sustainable Development (DESD).
At the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg, South Africa, in September 2002, the Japanese government proposed to cooperate with non-governmental organizations in actively promoting education for sustainable development(ESD) in various countries around the world on the basis of international cooperation,and succeeded in having the period from 2005 to 2014 designated as the UN DESD.
In 2005, coinciding with the start of the Decade, the concept of Regional Centres of Expertise(RCEs) was established by the United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Studyof Sustainability (UNU-IAS) for the purpose of achieving the long-term goals of ESD, suchas environment stewardship, social justice, and improvement of quality of life.
The development of RCEs got underway in conjunction with the DESD. From an initial
seven RCEs worldwide at launch, the number has grown steadily, totalling 75 RCEs at the
five-year mark, and 129 as of June 2014, as we approach the 10-year mark.
Individual RCEs are located in regions of a certain size, which share major economic cultural and social characteristics. Since the issues faced by RCEs vary depending on eacharea of activity, the challenges that they deal with and the content of their activities are also
varied. However, as the number of RCEs increases, this will lead to individual regions working together to address common problems and themes through a stronger RCE network.
Global-scale issues in particular, such as climate change and biodiversity, require an international approach that goes beyond single regions and countries. Consequently, it is likely

9that RCEs will continue to spread, and more and more will be expected of their great efforts.
I am currently serving as the Secretary-General of the Parliamentary Members Caucus for
ESD Promotion. In addition, I have worked for the spread and promotion of ESD in mycapacity as the Parliamentary Secretary of the Environment, the Director of the Environment Division of the Liberal Democratic Party, and now as the Senior Vice-Minister of theEnvironment. Since 2014 is the final year of the DESD, the Ministry of the Environment
convened the “Round Table Conference on Measures for Promoting Environmental Education after the DESD” for the purpose of examining measures for the promotion of ESD in
Japan after the conclusion of the Decade. The conference was chaired by me and joined byexperts and others. In terms of its achievements, a report is currently being compiled inwhich RCE activities are also highlighted. We recognize that the activities of RCEs and otherorganizations will need to be further strengthened even after the conclusion of the DESD.
Also in 2014, as we reach an important milestone marking the DESD’s final year, Japan will
host the UNESCO World Conference on ESD. In addition to celebrating the achievementsof the past 10 years, participants at the World Conference will be able to discuss and debate
measures for promoting ESD beyond 2014. In this, RCEs will play a significant role. Arisingfrom these discussions, the Global Action Programme and the Aichi-Nagoya Declaration on
ESD are expected to be launched.
As we continue to further strengthen our cooperation with United Nations University, both
I and the Ministry of the Environment of Japan are committed to making the best use of our
precious time in steadily promoting RCEs and other initiatives for ESD.
I would like to express my deepest respect for the dedicated efforts made by UNU-IAS andall those concerned. I sincerely hope that this publication reaches a wide readership, andthat it will serve to deepen the understanding of RCEs and ESD.

Tomokatsu Kitagawa
Senior Vice-Minister
Ministry of the Environment, Japan
August 2014

10

Forewords

As the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014),

for which UNESCO is the lead agency, reaches its conclusion, we can takestock of the major advances made during this time throughout the world bypeople who share the same passion and vision of an achievable sustainable
future.

Much progress has been made in 10 years. Yet, we cannot be complacent. The
underlying issues remain constant and challenging. Poverty, climate change,
frequent natural disasters and dramatic social inequities make the need toempower everyone to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values
necessary to shape a sustainable future more pressing than ever. Sustainable
development cannot just be achieved through technological solutions, politicalregulations or financial instruments. The reality is that sustainable development can only be achieved if individuals and societies change the way they
think and act. This is where education plays a central role in bringing aboutchange. Education can help current and future generations find solutions forsocial, environmental and economic sustainability challenges – at both local
and global levels.
We can see the growing trend where the role of education is being recognized as a vital element in helping societies create sustainable futures. The global network of Regional Centres of Expertise on ESD, launched during the
UNU-UNESCO International Conference on Globalisation and Education for
Sustainable Development in June 2005 in Nagoya, has been an important contribution to the UN Decade of ESD. Promoting ESD at the local level throughmultistakeholder, cross-sectoral partnerships, the global community of RCEs,
coordinated by UNU-IAS, is clearly a success story to build on. Boosting its
size from seven RCEs in 2005 to the current 129, the network demonstrates
the success of its unique concept – building partnerships for thinking globally
while acting locally.

11

More recently, in 2012, the UN Conference on Sustainable Development(Rio+20) set the stage for the future of sustainable development. In Rio, countries
made a strong commitment to ESD, resolving to promote ESD beyond the endof the UN Decade. And now, in line with this commitment, the 2014 World
Conference on ESD will see the launch of the Global Action Programme on ESD(GAP), which has already been endorsed by the 37th session of the UNESCO
General Conference.
Knowing that effective and innovative solutions to sustainable development
challenges are frequently developed at the local level, one of the five Priority
Action Areas of the GAP will focus on accelerating the search for sustainable
development solutions at the local level through ESD. This will include encouraging local communities and municipal authorities to develop community-based ESD programs. Clearly, the aforementioned experience of the RCEcommunity provides an important foundation to build upon in driving forward
this Priority Action Area to help diversify and expand existing networks.
ESD can only be successful when we continue fostering and building strong
partnerships that bring together the global and the local level. The global network of RCEs can serve as a model for both – strong partnerships and local engagement. Using these good examples of what works for ESD we can face theworld’s ongoing challenges together with confidence. This is why we count on
our continuing good collaboration and enhanced action within the frameworkof the Global Action Programme on ESD.

Soo-Hyang Choi
Director
Division of Teaching, Learning and Content
Education Sector
UNESCO

12

Forewords

If there is a reason to celebrate as the United Nations Decade on Educationfor Sustainable Development comes to an end in 2014, it would be because of
the successful implementation of the visionary idea of the Regional Centresof Expertise in Education for Sustainable Development launched at the startof the Decade. A brainchild of the United Nations University and its Institutefor the Advanced Study of Sustainability (the UNU Institute of Advanced
Studies), it opens up a new vista of thinking, organizing and implementing theconcept of ESD so that it can be better realized, in more concrete and tangible
ways that are readily understood and governable, as a unique platform for collaboration among the various stakeholders. It is no wonder that in the last
decade the number of RCEs multiplied from a mere seven in 2005 to 129 byJune 2014, spanning institutions and communities the world over.
This is an important testimony not only to the tremendous interest in addressing
issues related to sustainable development across the globe but, more importantly, to the practicality of RCEs as vehicles for multistakeholder and cross-sectoral
partnerships for ESD in diverse communities, regions and nations, transcending borders and other conventional geopolitical barriers. The fact that the
number of RCEs continues to grow despite the rigorous selection criteria andprocess shows a high degree of acceptance of the idea as a game-changer inshifting the notion of education forward in the context of sustainable development. Indeed, the idea has given rise to many more useful lessons drawn fromthe numerous experiences provided by each RCE currently operating on amyriad of issues and situations to make ESD a reality.

13

Each of these experiences is a case study in its own right, in meeting what is
known as the of education today, namely, to be directly engaged with the community to co-learn and co-create relevant long-term and sustainable solutions
for the well-being of the members of the community. Collectively, the arrayof case studies can present a catalogue of best practices in dealing with theissues of sustainable development from the educational perspective, ranging
from curricular design to pedagogy, and eventually translating into pragmatic
solutions on the ground. Unlike the present tendency to implement a onesize-fits-all solution, the experiences of the RCEs are sensitive to multiple
differences – be they sociocultural, geopolitical or economic – making themmore adaptable and flexible for sharing and implementing all that education
should be about.
These are just some of the reasons that call for celebration as we endeavour totake the RCEs to the next level and continue to expand the idea for many generations to come. On that note, on behalf of the International Association of
Universities, I offer our warm congratulations on work well done, as reflectedin this commemorative volume. We pledge our utmost support for the further
development of the RCEs in the next decade and beyond.

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
President, International Association of Universities, Paris;
Founder-Convener, RCE Penang, Malaysia

14

Forewords

At the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, the Johannesburg

Plan of Implementation recommended the designation of a decade dedicatedto education for sustainable development. It was indeed historic when the UN
General Assembly declared the period spanning 2005 to 2014 as the UN Decadeof Education for Sustainable Development. The Ubuntu Alliance, comprisedof the world’s foremost educational and scientific/technological institutions
including United Nations University, signed the Ubuntu Declaration at the
Johannesburg Summit in an effort to make integrated solutions work for sustainable development and to mobilize the education sector to contribute to it.

The establishment of the ESD Programme within the United Nations University system, currently anchored at the UNU Institute for the Advanced Studyof Sustainability, constituted a strong foundation of multistakeholder partnerships aimed at responding to the DESD call for action, particularly in termsof advocacy and dissemination of ESD principles, promotion of regional or
local approaches to ESD learning, strengthening of ESD activities of higher
education institutions, and capacity development of educators and change
agents. UNU-IAS conceived of and enabled the launching of the multistakeholder, community-rooted, global initiative known as Regional Centres of Expertise on ESD. RCEs build platforms where ESD stakeholders are empowered,share information and experiences, and seek partnerships for action in thelocal and regional communities.
As Secretariat of the Global RCE Service Centre, UNU-IAS is proud that theRCE movement has exceeded expectations and risen to become an ESD learn-

15

ing force to reckon with. RCEs around the world manifest the paradigm ofchange – that only when global concerns are addressed locally, local actions
are aligned with national and global policies, and when communities of action
take diverse and multiple stakeholders on board, can the ambitions of the
DESD have a transformative impact.
The achievements of the RCE community are praiseworthy as they display
real contributions to societal transformations. As the global education sector
marks the end of the DESD, it behoves the RCE community to take stock ofand reflect on the achievements and challenges of the Decade, learn lessons
from it, and look beyond 2014. In cooperation with like-minded organizations
and networks, it is expected that the RCE community will contribute significantly to the implementation of the Global Action Programme on ESD and to
the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
This commemorative publication underpins our commitment to effective implementation of the Global Action Programme on ESD as the global RCE community. This compendium of RCE achievements, contributions and challenges
in the pursuit of creating sustainable societies serves as a source of inspiration
for all ESD stakeholders. At the same time it offers a resource for ESD learning
for action. The RCE community deserves to be complimented on releasing thissplendid work in commemoration of the successful conclusion of the DESD.
Kazuhiko Takemoto
Director, UNU-IAS

16

Tongyeong Declaration on RCEs andEducation for Sustainable Development

17

Tongyeong Declaration on RCEs
and Education for Sustainable
Development
Adopted in Tongyeong, Republic of Korea,
24 September 2012

The global network of Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable
Development (RCEs), acknowledged by the United Nations University with thesupport of the Ubuntu Alliance, having met in Tongyeong, Republic of Korea, andreaffirming all previous declarations related to education for sustainable development (ESD), hereby declare their commitment to implementing strategic actions
that build a global learning space on ESD.
As the world looks to 2014 and beyond, RCEs recognize their distinctive ability torespond to our global systems in crisis and their moral responsibility to act on thesewell beyond the end of the Decade on Education for Sustainable Development.
RCEs are a tool for transformation to a more sustainable society, combining
education and action for sustainable development. RCEs reaffirm their strong
commitment to improving their systems of governance and quality of their actions. They are committed to expanding their collaboration with as wide a number of stakeholders as possible, and further expanding the global network in five
years, thereby increasing their global impact.
RCEs are dedicated to building their capacities to plan and implement collaborative ESD projects critical for establishing a global learning space. Capacity development will be viewed as a transformative learning process, generated from within
the RCE network.
RCEs will put sustainable development issues into a scientific and social context,
provide a constructive critique and help to develop new policies, program and projects. At the same time, RCEs will continue to dedicate themselves to advancing
sustainable market opportunities and other sustainable livelihood strategies for all
individuals – especially for the most marginalized – to improve human well-being
and ecosystem health.
RCEs recognize their unique position, as grassroots, multistakeholder networks,
with distinctive capacities for research and innovation that can revitalize education
at all levels through flagship projects. As regionally based yet globally connected
networks, RCEs form a global learning space on ESD, working to ensure that allindividuals have the opportunity to learn the values, behaviours and lifestyles required for a sustainable future and for positive social transformation.

18

Part I RCEs: The Beginning and Progression

Part I
RCEs: The Beginningand Progression

In 2003, United Nations University spearheaded a global
program on education for sustainable development througha multitude of initiatives for learning. With UNU envisioning learning across the local-global space as its strategic
core, while keeping communities at centre stage, Regional
Centres of Expertise on ESD (RCEs) were introduced as amultistakeholder initiative of learning for change, withhigher education and school communities as the lead actors.
Thus what began as a modest story of a small network ofseven acknowledged RCEs soon picked up momentum
across regions to become, in a decade, a large network of
129 RCEs.

19This book begins with a narrative of the RCE concept and thecontext in which it evolved. Part I highlights the initial assumptions and expectations of thought leaders in the movement
about the characteristics and results of RCE work. It also
outlines the trajectory of diverse metaphors, meanings andmethods through which individual RCEs as well as the RCE
network developed, ranging in ideas from engines of mobilization and knowledge hubs to communities of practice andsustainability commons.

20

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		Part I

Chapter 1

Regional Centres of Expertiseon Education for Sustainable
Development: Evolution ofConcept and Practices
1

Zinaida Fadeeva and Yoko Mochizuki

At the UNU-UNESCO International Conference on Globalisation and Educationfor Sustainable Development held in June 2005 in Nagoya, Japan, which celebrated the Asia-Pacific launch of the United Nations Decade of Education for
Sustainable Development (DESD), United Nations University (UNU) declared
the establishment of the first group of seven Regional Centres of Expertise on
Education for Sustainable Development (RCEs). The network of RCEs continues
to expand and, as of August 2014, there were 129 RCEs worldwide, in Africa,
North and South America, Asia-Pacific and Europe.
The RCEs have significantly contributed towards the implementation of the
DESD. Designed as networks of formal, non-formal and informal education
organizations to deliver education for sustainable development (ESD), RCEs
have generated excitement, relevance and value in engaging various stakeholders to foster sustainability.
This chapter provides a historical background of the RCE initiative and clarifies
the underlying beliefs, values and principles that drove its creation. It discusses
the evolution of the concept and practice of RCEs, reporting on the development of a global network of RCEs and emerging “communities of practice”.
1 This publication draws upon two earlier published articles with some additional insights and reflections. These articles are Mochizuki,
Y. & Fadeeva, Z. (2008). Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development: An overview. International Journalof Sustainability in Higher Education,9(4), 369-381; and, Fadeeva, Z. & Mochizuki, Y. (2010) Roles of Regional Centres of Expertise on
Education for Sustainable Development: Lessons learnt in the first half of the UNDESD. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development,4(1), 51-59.

21

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		Regional Centres of Expertise on ESD (RCEs)

Vertical links

22

Formal education

Non-formal andInformal education• Universities• Universities• Secondary• Secondary

Schools

Schools• Primary• Primary

Schools

Schools• (Science) museums• Botanical gardens• Zoos• Natural parks• Local governments• Community leaders• Media• Local businesses• Local NGOs

Laterallinks

Horizontal links
Figure 1.1 Collaborative links of an RCE

Origins of the
RCE Initiative:
From global vision
to local actions

An RCE is not a physical centre but an institutional mechanism to facilitate sharedlearning for sustainable development. An RCE is a network of existing local-regional
institutions mobilized to jointly promote all types of learning for a sustainable
future (Figure 1.1). RCEs, both individually and collectively, aspire to achieve thegoals of DESD and beyond.
At the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 2002,
a multinational plea was made for partnerships that would allow a diverse array ofactors to jointly take action towards the common goal of sustainable development(SD). The Summit shifted the focus of SD from normative statements about “whatshould be done” to the strategy of implementation. The RCE program becamea direct response to this important shift from words to actions. Following the
WSSD and the UN General Assembly Resolution on the DESD, the UNU Institutefor the Advanced Study of Sustainability (formerly known as the UNU Institute ofAdvanced Studies, UNU-IAS), launched a program on education for sustainable
development in 2003. UNU-IAS developed a concept paper on RCEs and presented
it to the international community during the Twelfth Session of the Commission
on Sustainable Development (CSD) in April 2004 (UNU, 2004).
Since 2004, UNU and UNU-IAS have worked with the RCE community on the continuous development of the concept, presenting the evolving idea and associatedpractices of RCEs at various international conferences and meetings. The idea
has been well received by a wide range of actors in the SD and ESD communities
owing, partially, to the flexibility of the interpretation and implementation. In order
to better understand the evolving nature of the concept and practice of RCEs, andgrasp the potential of the RCE scheme, the next section tells the story of what
UNU originally intended to achieve through the RCEs.

Part IThe original impetus behind the RCE initiative came from the perceived need to RCE as a Strategy
focus on action rather than theory. The RCE initiative was proposed in order toovercome inertia created by the difficulty of reaching international consensus on
the nature and scope of ESD2. One of the perspectives on the development of ESD
as an “appropriate education for a sustainable future” is presented in Box 1.1.
For the architects of the concept, RCEs were, initially, a measure designed to help
address deficiencies in the education system identified through efforts to promote
environmental education in the formal education sector since the late 1980s. Oneof the identified deficiencies was that the latest scientific and technical knowledge
was not well reflected in what was being taught in schools or that references toparticular phenomena did not relate to the realities of the regions. The recognitionof the need to narrow the communication gap between scientists and educators
led to the signing of the Ubuntu Declaration, upon which the UNU strategy topromote ESD is partly based (Box 1.2).
The RCE concept, first and foremost, was derived from the experience of formal
education, including higher education. Although this does not limit the scope of
RCE activities to formal education, initially one of the most important goals of the
RCE initiative was conceived as that of supplementing
the formal education curriculum, pedagogies and acBox 1.1
tions for implementation. As a means of achieving
The Emergence and Development of ESD:
this goal, the RCE concept emphasizes strengthening
One person’s perspective
horizontal and vertical links within the formal educa(By Charles Hopkins, UNESCO Chair of ESD,
tion sector as well as promoting partnerships between
supporter of RCE development in many regions)formal and non-formal education institutions. The
latter are particularly significant as the problem of enThe emergence of education for sustainablegagement across the sectors, especially between highdevelopment has taken many pathways in
er education and other knowledge institutions, havecountries around the world. No one person
left much to be desired. The engagement of different
can give the definitive history. However, as
knowledge sectors came, among other issues, fromone who became involved in sustainable dean understanding of the complexity of sustainability
velopment during the Brundtland hearings
issues and the lack of lasting or ready-made solutionsin the mid-1980s, I am often asked to shareto address them. Multiple approaches and perspectives
some historical perspectives. I am pleased to
explored through sustained collaborations were, in theshare a few of the highlights in the developeyes of the authors of the RCE concept, key to learning
ment of ESD within formal education, which
and innovativeness towards sustainability.
is my primary area of experience.
In UNU’s partnership approach incarnated as the RCE
initiative, the initial emphasis was not so much on thecreation of equitable partnerships – which are often
viewed as a necessary condition for fostering social
learning and innovation – but on the creation of a
local/regional knowledge base in which higher education institutions (HEIs) and other knowledge-relatedFirst of all, a few words regarding the earlydays and the emergence of ESD. I had theprivilege of being one of a small group of individuals that was invited to work on a writing
committee to develop Agenda 21 in the preparations for the Earth Summit to be held in Rio
cont.

2 The initial interpretation of ESD largely focused on themes such as equating ESD and environmental education or highlighting that ESD must transcend different adjectival educations, such asenvironmental education, human rights education, peace education, gender education, etc. Some
discourses focused on the principles behind ESD, e.g. the Talloires Declaration or highlighting
ESD’s overarching nature.

23

24

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		de Janeiro in1992. Our task was to work on achapter in the section of Agenda 21 that dealt
with how we could actually implement sustainable development. Our chapter, Chapter 36,
was on the role of using the world’s education,
public awareness and training systems to assist
sustainability, and was simply called “Education, Public Awareness and Training”.
During one of the first meetings of the writing
team, a member suggested that we just needed
better environmental education and morerecycling. In response, the president of a university from the developing world pointed outthat he had youth who were already excellent
at recycling as they lived their entire lives in thecity dumps. He said that these people needed
quality basic education to address the unbearable poverty that would lead to an unsustainable future due to civil unrest. This insightful
response shaped the thinking of the working
group from this point on. Many of us had comefrom an environmental education background,but as a school superintendent I realized thewisdom in his remarks. From then on we took
the title of our chapter and used the threecomponents – education, public awarenessand training – to outline and define the action
areas or thrusts of ESD. However, we split education into two thrusts. The first one was to provide access to a quality basic education. The
second was to re-orient existing education,
primarily aimed at the developed world, to address sustainability. The sad outcome of Agenda 21 in the early years of the 1990s was thatsustainable development was largely seen as
the purview of ministries of environment, andministries of education were not really engaged.
The period between 1992 and 2002 saw ESD
struggle to assert itself as a separate entity as
several adjectival educations such as peaceeducation, development education, global
education and environmental education all
claimed to be the same as ESD. All did address
aspects of sustainability but none really addressed access to and retention in a quality
education. They saw the second thrust of re-orienting education as the important component

and aligned with their concerns and competence. No adjectival proponent saw the possibility of re-orienting formal education in its entirety, as was the vision of the Agenda 21 writing
team. Rather, each saw an opportunity to add
yet another concern to an already overcrowded curriculum. It was difficult for UNESCO
to deal with this, as the intent was to engage
these adjectival educations as allies, yet not
succumb to agreeing that any one of them was
identical or equivalent to ESD. Nowhere was
the issue as difficult as at the 1997 UNESCO
Conference celebrating the 20th anniversaryof the Tbilisi Declaration on environmental
education (EE) in Thessaloniki, where the issueof EE versus ESD became a major stumbling
block.
The tide turned in 2002 at the 10th anniversaryof Rio, at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. It became clearthat Japan, supported by a number of countries, wanted a UN Decade on ESD. The successful move to create the Decade from 2005
to 2014 has made a major difference. With
the Decade, UNESCO had the opportunity
to engage their delegations and ministriesof education. Their roles and responsibilities
became clearer, and by the mid-Decade Bonn
Conference in 2009, many ministers saw that
actually re-orienting their entire education system, preschool through to higher education,
was not only possible but necessary. The Bonn
Declaration brought credibility. Early adopterssuch as the K-12 system in Manitoba, Canada,
and higher education in Sweden and Germany
were inspiring.
Currently there is a movement to unite ESD
further with the concept of the first thrust – access and retention in a quality education. The
original idea of those of us who were writing
Chapter 36 was that the first thrust was aimed at
the developing countries and, in synergy withthe emerging Education For All (EFA) movement, the second thrust – re-orienting existingeducation to address sustainability – was aimed
more at the developed world. For the first 20
years, ESD has largely focused on the secondcont.

Part I

institutions are expected to play a key role in ensuring
scientifically-sound ESD. These higher education institutions were especially encouraged to take the leadin developing RCEs because they were expected toprovide guidance and leadership in all education andtake the initiative to align education from preschool
through university (Hopkins, McKeown & Van Ginkel, 2005). Furthermore, HEIs, as organizations withstable human and financial resources, were also seen
as parts of institutions that have a social responsibility and moral obligation (derived from their academic
freedom and autonomy) to address sustainability
challenges.
Precisely this combination of the normative expectations from HEIs and their perceived institutional
capacity and stability makes them the backbone of
the local knowledge base in the RCE concept. UNU
strategically emphasized the involvement of HEIs in
RCE efforts as a key to ensuring the sustainability andquality of emerging RCEs and, at the same time, as ameans to enhancing the role of HEIs in contributing
to SD.

thrust while EFA was seen as the carrier of thefirst thrust. This was because adjectival NGOsor units within schools and universities carriedout most of ESD. Now that ministries of
education are entering the quest for ESD,
there is renewed attention to the first thrust
beyond EFA. Many students in the developed
world also need, yet are not receiving, accessand retention in a quality education that prepares them for the 21st century.
We realize that ministries of education do not
see their primary goal as saving the future
but as delivering a quality education. For too
many, quality is interpreted as achieving better
Program for International Student Achievement (PISA) scores in language, mathematics
and science. While these are important, there
are other subjects, aspects of education
as addressed by the Delour’s Commission
such as learning to be and learning to live
together, which comprise education quality.
Lastly, let me comment on another aspect of
ESD and that is the emergence of three components: knowledge as in curriculum content,pedagogy as in problem-based learning, andtaking action. Education for sustainable development is not a discipline or pedagogy
but rather a purpose that engages appropriate curricula across all disciplines and pedagogical approaches. It is an appropriate
education for a sustainable future for all,where “all” is not limited to humans. Another important assumption of the original RCE
concept is that there is a need to mobilize as many
actors as possible – in all sectors of society, at all levelsof formal education, among people of all ages – in order to promote ESD and create what UNU calls a Global Learning Space for SD. This need was identified
based on lessons learned through efforts to promote
ESD from Rio to Johannesburg, which are not generally considered as a spectacular success (UNESCAP,
2003)3. There is a consensus on the idea that ESD
must be promoted at all levels – international, national and subnational – but international efforts to promote ESD have been rather fragmented and have not been very successful in producing visible outcomes and tangible benefits. UNU chose the regional/local level
as its strategic focus, rather than dispersing its limited resources on initiatives
aimed at different levels. An RCE is primarily meant to attain the provision of aplatform for multistakeholder dialogue to share information and experience andseek ways to promote interdisciplinary and multisectoral collaboration for ESD at
the regional/local level. An RCE can be interpreted as a mobilization mechanism
to achieve much-coveted “locally-relevant and culturally appropriate” ESD and a

3 Leading to the Johannesburg Summit was a realization that a more successful pursuit of the sustainable development goals as stipulated by Agenda 21 had to be built on partnerships that go beyond
intergovernmental agreements. When dealing with sustainability challenges, especially at the local
level, such partnerships that also include the private sector and civil society, lead to new forms ofparticipatory governance and engagement.

25

26

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		

concrete manifestation of the “partnership approach” emphasized in the DESD
International Implementation Scheme (UNESCO, 2005).

The RCE Initiative
as a UniqueContribution
to the DESD

While the RCE initiative also emphasizes the importance of formal approaches to
education and training, its scope goes beyond formal education and includes all
aspects of ESD. How does an RCE facilitate local stakeholders to implement ESD
in a more holistic and coherent and coordinated manner that can address local
sustainability challenges?

Combining formal and non-formal education
In principle, RCEs assist the enhancement of horizontal links among schools at thesame level of education,vertical alignment of curriculum from primary throughuniversity education, and development of lateral linkages between formal andnon-formal sectors of the education community (Figure 1.1).

Box 1.2
Ubuntu Alliance and Committee ofPeers for the RCE Community
At WSSD, 11 leading educational and scientific organizations, under the leadership of
UNU-IAS, signed the Ubuntu Declaration,with goals to strengthen collaboration between science and technology researchersand educators to better integrate the latest
science and technology for sustainable development into educational programs (all subjects, all levels) and to strengthen cooperation
between formal and non-formal education.
The 11 organizations, called the Ubuntu Alliance members, are:1

Academy of Sciences for theDeveloping World (TWAS)
2
African Academy of Science (AAS)
3
Association of University Leaders fora Sustainable Future (ULSF)
4Copernicus-Campus
5
Global Higher Education for Sustainability Partnership (GHESP)
6International Association of
Universities (IAU)
7International Council for Science (ICSU)
8
Science Council of Asia (SCA)
9
United Nations Educational, Scientific		 and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) cont.

UNU recognized the limitation of formal educationand emphasized a need to link formal and non-formal
education. With its emphasis on reforming formal
education by way of enhancing collaboration among
schools and mobilizing non-school actors in the service of formal education, however, the RCE initiative
could potentially reinforce the dominant image of
ESD as restricted mainly to formal education (UNUIAS, 2005; Fadeeva, 2007). Fadeeva and Mochizuki(2007) addressed the potential of an RCE as an institutional mechanism to facilitate social learning and
an innovation to create “equitable learning partnerships between the combined expertise of communities, professions and governments” (Keen, Brown &Dyball, 2005, p. 6).
When the RCE concept was actually implemented bydifferent regions, the requirement for the establishment and continual reinforcement of horizontal, vertical and lateral linkages facilitated local stakeholders
to address their own requirements in collaborative
alliances. There are diverse efforts to promote thepractice of what is called ESD, and the extent to which
ESD is associated with formal or non-formal education
varies widely. One of the strengths of the RCE modelis that it can be used by local ESD stakeholders to
direct mobilization efforts either towards the formal
education sector or non-formal education sector, depending on their specific needs. For example, in aregion where ESD was almost exclusively associatedwith NGO activities, as in the case of India, the local
RCE promoters could use the RCE model to direct
more engagement efforts towards collaboration withlocal schools and local HEIs. In fact, results of thePart I

research conducted in 2008 among some RCEs, e.g.
Pune, Lucknow and Guwahati, showed that the RCEconcept succeeded in encouraging participation of
HEIs that had previously been hesitant to engage incollaborative activities (RCE Coordinator communications, 2008).

1011

United Nations University (UNU)
World Federation of Engineering
Organizations (WFEO)

In addition, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) were invited to join the Ubuntu Alliance in 2006.
Copernicus Alliance, established in place ofthe disbanded Copernicus-Campus, joined
the Ubuntu Alliance in 2013.

While a broad consensus exists on the need to promote partnerships between formal education (school
education) and non-formal education, the necessity of
involving HEIs in RCE efforts has not gone unquestioned. When a municipal government or an NGO wastaking the lead in developing an RCE, it was someA group of organizations from the Ubuntu
times suggested that local HEIs lacked willingness
Alliance have formed the Ubuntu Committee
and/or capacity to engage in RCE efforts. Since strengof Peers for the RCEs to advise and guidethening ESD activities of HEIs is one of the major
UNU during the RCE acknowledgement procomponents of the ESD Programme of UNU-IAS, incess, and provide strategic advice on the devolvement of HEIs is a necessary condition for estabvelopment of the RCE community. lishing an RCE. Nevertheless, this does not rule out
the possibility that an excellent local knowledge basecan be created without involving a local HEI. It is important to understand that the
key role expected of HEIs in the RCE concept was derived from the UNU strategy
for HEIs. In other words, the UNU does not assume that HEIs naturally occupy
a central position in developing an RCE or in regional development in general, indifferent parts of the world.

Combining top-down and bottom-up approaches
UNU-IAS (2005) specified four core elements that should be addressed by an
RCE: governance, collaboration, research and development (R&D), and transformative education. On the one hand, fulfilling the core elements of an RCE often
means implementing externally induced reforms, such as enhancing the role oflocal universities in ESD, identifying new partners and forming new alliances, in a
top-down manner. On the other hand, an RCE cannot be created without a bottomup approach to local concerns that begins with details on the ground.
One of the functions of an RCE is to incorporate bottom-up methods designed to
identify and include the needs and interests of a wide range of social groups in
the region. To reinforce the bottom-up approach, UNU has specifically stated thatan RCE cannot be created from scratch and that it is not an entirely new initiative,
though it could be in some regions. An RCE builds on existing alliances and actions towards ESD and SD while helping to enhance them.
What makes an RCE distinct from other local initiatives is its wider geographic
scope (Box 1.3) that supposedly enables it to perform distinctive functions such as
disseminating good practices on a wider scale and serving as a knowledge base4.
4 Although an RCE cannot be limited to a small village where there is no IHE, smaller-scale community-based activities (for example, an environmental education project in a village school) canconstitute RCE activities. While there may be activities that cover the entire geographic scope of an
RCE (for example, development of a website dedicated to the RCE or teaching materials for school
teachers in the region), it needs to be noted that the geographic scope of each RCE activity does notalways coincide with that of the RCE.

27

28

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		Part IDue to its broader geographic scope that allows diversity in participating institutions and in ongoingand planned activities, an RCE is required to have abody that is responsible for the overall coordinationand communication strategy of the RCE. A facilitative
or decisionmaking body of an RCE is usually set
up as an ESD/RCE Coordination Body or Promotion Commission, consisting of the representatives of initial partner organizations. Broader participants in the RCE can be theorized as actors (bothorganizations and individuals) who willingly andcreatively participate in and contribute to RCE activities, rather than as those who carry out uniform
activities designed by the ESD/RCE Coordinators(see this chapter’s section on “RCE as a Coordinator” for more information on RCE governanceand coordination strategies).

Box 1.3
Understanding “Regions” in the RCE
Concept
A “region” in the RCE concept is, in principle, a part of a country having definablecharacteristics such as Bretagne, Tohoku
or Catalonia, or a cross-border area with asimilar size. A region should be sufficiently
large to include various institutions such asuniversities, museums, zoos, botanical gardens and more than a handful of primaryand secondary schools, and should be smallenough to make frequent face-to-face communication possible.

It is important to recognize that an RCE is both a UNU initiative – in the sensethat UNU requires local stakeholders to follow its guidelines for RCE mobilization– and a local voluntary initiative to promote local action. An RCE can begin witha small number of core local institutions that have been introduced to the RCEconcept (through various channels such as international conferences, workshops,
meetings of academic associations and personal contacts) and voluntarily work together to draw a blueprint for an RCE on behalf of inhabitants of the region. Since
it is practically impossible to involve all residents in the region in devising initialstrategies for implementing the RCE concept and launching an RCE in a relatively
short time, UNU does not require – though it does encourage – RCE candidates
to secure the maximum possible degree of citizen participation at the initial stageof RCE development. While UNU explicitly requests RCE candidates to include
certain types of institutions, such as HEIs and local schools or organizations
representing school systems, in the initial partner group of an RCE for the formal acknowledgement process, it allows RCEs a stepwise approach with regard toresident participation in RCE efforts because an RCE is essentially a network of
local institutions. It is therefore crucial for the core local promoters of an RCE toaddress the issue of participatory design and creation of a “local knowledge base”.
Since the launch of the initial group in 2005, RCEs have demonstrated a variety of Multiple Roles androles, depending on regional needs and the local stakeholders’ differing interpre- Interpretations
tations of ESD and RCEs. These RCEs have evolved over time both in the issues
they address and in their organization. An impressive variety of perceived RCE
roles is illustrated by the metaphors that RCE stakeholders in different regions
shared in the reports of their activities (Box 1.4). A network for the promotion of
ESD and sustainability; a path for a more sustainable society; a space for reflection;a partnership; a community of practice and innovation; a resource pool – thesehighlight a variety of roles and directions that coexist in the community forming
fertile and resilient ground for future development.

29

30

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		

RCE as an Engine
for Mobilization:
Coming together

Mobilizing local champions for ESD

As described in the previous sections, the initial conceptualization of RCEs by
UNU portrayed them as “a network that is designed to strengthen the collaboration
for ESD among regional and local actors” (UNU-IAS, 2005). Portrayed as an engine
for mobilization, the RCE is viewed as a strategy that will build linkages among
local/regional stakeholders, both within and outside the educational community,and create alliances capable of addressing sustainability issues relevant to the region through learning and action. The RCEs as interorganizational networking initiatives are expectedto add value to the regions and their educational sysBox 1.4
tems (Fadeeva & Mochizuki, 2007).
Metaphors Describing RCEs
(extracted from 2009 RCE Reports)
Because the RCE movement is based on the appealing
global vision of the DESD, is promoted in the context
Our RCE is:of the DESD by a UN agency, and is based on regional
A bridge between prospective and the retropartnerships, it has attracted the attention of many
spective sustainable activities, and the elixir
people who eventually became champions of theof sustainable development (RCE Kano, NiRCEs. The goal of RCEs relates to the broad and ingeria).
spirational goal of ESD put forward by UNESCO:“a world where everyone has the opportunity to benefit
A community of practice responding to life
from quality education and learn the values, behaviour
threatening issues and risks in our region
and lifestyles required for a sustainable future and for(RCE KwaZulu Natal, South Africa).
positive societal transformation”. It is noted that the articulation of a desirable state or an appealing idea often
A lively pool of engaged institutions andserves as a pull towards action (Sharma, 2000). Referpeople pushing forward the idea of sustainence to the DESD agenda gave such a pull, together
able development (RCE Graz-Styria, Europe).
with a legitimate space for activities undertaken by
local stakeholders, regardless of how ESD and susA bridge between governmental and NGO
tainable development are interpreted in their region.
initiatives, between various educational leRCE Saskatchewan (Canada), for example, foundvels and between different RCE/ESD partners
that recognition by UNU provided the legitimacy andthroughout our RCE region (RCE Hamburg,
credibility that senior officials and administrators
Germany).
from the government and academia needed to become
involved.
Depicted in the painting “L‘Angelus Du Soir“
by Jean Francoise Millet (1859): evening falls
Early RCEs carried the ideas of RCEs and ESD to new
and with the work of the quotidian over weregions using their professional and social networks.
reflect on its ups and downs (RCE North East,
RCE Rhine-Meuse, one of the initial seven RCEs andUK).
the first in Europe, has played a significant mentoringrole for RCEs in Europe and Russia. RCE KwaZulu
Like the steady pre-monsoon shower; it‘s
Natal (South Africa) assisted in developing RCEs in
yet to become the downpour of the Kodagu
Maputo (Mozambique), Swaziland, and Zomba (Malmonsoon (RCE Kodagu, India).
awi). Later, RCE KwaZulu Natal received a grant fromthe Swedish International Development Cooperation
A network of people with a common concern
Agency (SIDA) for providing support in the establishof ESD (RCE Lucknow, India).
ment of 14 RCEs in southern Africa, at least one ineach of the member states of the South African DeA multistakeholder network of change agentsvelopment Community (SADC) (see Box 1.5). RCEdeveloping mutual education in order toDelhi (India), having The Energy and Resourcesbuild sustainable life in the Ise-Mikawa River
Institute (TERI) as one of the key partners, used its
Basin (RCE Chubu, Japan).cont.

Part I

links to TERI offices in Mumbai and Goa to facilitate
mobilization of RCEs in these areas. Similarly, secretarial function held by the regional offices of the Centreof Environment Education (CEE) in India has provided an opportunity to introduce the RCE idea in
Pune, Kodagu, Bangalore, Guwahati, Lucknow and
Srinagar.

The second wave of mobilization
The second step of mobilization starts with inspired
regional champions from universities, local governments or, less frequently, civil society and private sector organizations taking charge of the local/regional
mobilization efforts. Particular local circumstances
determine who joins the ESD/RCE community and at
what stage. The RCE strategy requires engaging local
institutions of higher education and primary and secondary schools as stakeholders. The rest is left up to
local dynamics. As a result, RCEs feature a multiplicityof network compositions with central roles playedby municipal governments, universities or NGOs.
The number of key actors varies from a few to morethan a dozen, and the management structure ranges
from rigidly defined to very flexible. The variety is not
surprising – after all, the network composition anddynamics are the functions of local requirements andagreements.
Case studies from RCEs Rhine-Meuse and North East
(Rikers & Hermans, 2008; Doyle & Foy, 2010) show
ESD burgeoning in regions that experienced recent
economic decline. Goodwill and creativity can emerge
as a response to serious challenges and the lack ofeasy solutions. A number of initiatives have also beendeveloped in relative isolation. In these regions, RCEs
are creating synergies among partners for the firsttime. Mobilization of an RCE in Kyrgyzstan, for example, has assisted in the process of bringing together
representatives of educational institutions, NGOs
and, notably, governmental representatives responsible for ESD work in the country.

Aiming to be the knowledge base of ESD in
the region (RCE Hyogo-Kobe, Japan).
The hub of various innovative learning sourceson conservation of energy, environment
and natural resources based upon the selfsufficiency economy in the south-westernregion of Thailand (RCE Cha-am, Thailand).
Gaining cooperation in development fromstate, private, community and education sectors. [It is] creative in producing interestinglearning activities, concentrating on developing a wide variety of activities and building
new knowledge (RCE Trang, Thailand).
In the water paddling towards our goal. It has
all of its ducks in order – now they have tostart swimming! There has been lots of activity
to date but it takes time to get organized(structure, terms of reference, recruitment,
establishing processes and protocol, andeducation) to the extent that is necessary to
make the kind of transformational communitychange we are working towards (RCE Greater
Sudbury, UK).
Similar to an invasive garden plant, spreading
widely underground, popping up in many unexpected locations to bloom brightly. Whilein gardening this may be considered to beundesirable, for an RCE it is the path to sustainability, in process as well as education anddevelopment (RCE Greater Sudbury, UK).
A community stakeholder network engaged inbalancing the area‘s triple bottom line throughconnection of citizens, companies, universities,
churches, non-profits and government, allfocused on creation of a sustainable lifestylethat meets the needs of the present and preserves the same for future generations (RCEGrand Rapids, USA).

An interesting subset of RCE roles related to mobilization of partners is that of an RCE as a space opener
and facilitator of communication in the region.
For example, RCE North East made a continuous effort to promote social transactions by involving its members in communication inopen publicspaces, which
are seen as having “natality” – a possibility for choice, transcending the given,
renewal and regeneration. Opening space and providing facilitationwere seenas critical for bringing together many previously disengaged communities.

31

32

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		

Box 1.5(By T. Pesanayi)
In southern Africa, the presence of a supporting structure, namely the Southern African Development Community’s Regional
Environmental Education Programme (SADC
REEP), assisted in cultivating the nine RCEs inthis sub-region. This entailed promoting the
RCE approach, helping interested networks
apply for RCE status, and supporting themto start their planned ESD actions throughtechnical support, mentoring and/or seedfunding. The SADC REEP also facilitated regular coordination meetings at the regional(southern Africa) level, which enabled sharingof experiences, collaborating on common
projects, and catalyzing local ESD action.
As a result, RCEs were encouraged to work
together on common projects that kept the
RCE network members and its vision together. This included, for example, a Telling
Stories of Best Practices booklet developed
by RCE Lesotho, capacity development manuals prepared by African RCEs, work on
establishing sustainability commons prepared by RCE Makana and RCE KwaZulu Natal,
and the writing of the UNU African Heritage
Practices Book and e-book, a collaborationof RCE Makana, RCE candidate Gauteng and
RCEs in Kenya.

Having new emancipating choices to think about andact on, now and in the future, is particularly attractive
to youth. RCE Saskatchewan (Dahms, McMartin &Petry, 2010) points to the mobilizing impact that the
RCE network had on establishing common actions
and dialogue between rural and urban communities
as well as among rival organizations. RCE Makana
has embraced a sustainability commons supported byan environmental learning centre that brings together
various communities of practice focusing on learning and sustainability practices in key areas ofinterest (Lotz-Sisitka, O’Donoghue & Wilmot, 2010).
This entails a commitment to the principle of publicknowledge commons in which knowledge of sustainability is not privatized, but shared among those wanting to learn new sustainability practices.
In RCE Rhine-Meuse, Rikers & Hermans (2008) observed that opening space and providing information
might be insufficient. Even with general willingnessof the partners to share knowledge and engage in joint
actions, working under a collaborative model is noteasy. The RCEs take an active role in making partners
aware of similarities and differences among partners’
policies and visions, goals, decisionmaking cycles andways of funding, thereby facilitating acceptance ofcompromises and synergies among their agendas.

The RCE development, like the development of many
inter-organizational networks for sustainable development, is an emerging process, full of unexpected developments and unintended consequences that canhardly be seen as a straightforward act of planningand management (Box 1.6). Mobilization requires
more time, analysis and experimentation than is commonly recognized, particularity when actors are diverse, and/or have little experience of prior collaboration or limited experience in the issue selected for collaboration. These challenges are faced by the RCE community globally.
With the formation of any consortium, there is always the danger that engagement of new partners can become problematic or that new partners will not fully
engage in negotiating strategies and courses of action. Such developments would
be unfortunate for RCEs, where the goal of continuous engagement of members
is of utmost importance. Meeting the challenge of expanding boundaries anddeepening the engagement of new stakeholders is crucial for continued RCE strategic development. New partners can be engaged through regional events or projects and through an explicit statement of open membership.

Part I

33

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		© Bert Kaufmann, CC BY - SA 2.0

34

Part I

Reflections
Intra-RCE Communication
RCE Saskatchewan, since its acknowledgement in 2007, has tried to promote dialogue and communication within the RCE in several ways. The initial RCE ESD
Recognition Event in 2008 allowed the RCE to help ESD projects throughout our
region self-identify for recognition; in addition, RCE coordinators, partners and supporters assisted in this identification. Bringing these groups together annually, yet indifferent cities and towns each year, allowed for common educational opportunities
and challenges across broad types of SD theme areas to be documented. The RCE
has frequently sought to have major ESD conferences sponsored by different communities or higher education partners alongside these recognition events to meetthe specific needs of these partners. As RCE-partnered events, the expectation is thatthese be open to diverse regional participation. In doing so, the RCE frequently has
brought in ESD leadership from outside the region (e.g. other RCEs such as RCEs
Tongyeong, Greater Western Sydney, Greater Portland and Grand Rapids, UNESCO,
Environment Canada, and sustainability organizations such as ESD Canada, Learning for a Sustainable Futures Foundation (LSF) and the Sustainability and Education Academy.
These national, provincial, and regional members participate actively in these eventsand then meet intentionally one-on-one with specific partner organizations, normallyin multiple communities during a single visit. The RCE has actively sought to serve
its partners by seeking to build ESD structures and supports within their own organizations, providing ongoing expertise to the higher education partners in doing soand, in some cases, being formally represented on the new internal sustainability
committees that are formed. We have focused on bringing unique challenges andopportunities together to help give voice to communities and advance ESD research
opportunities. This includes our flagship communities advancing living laboratories
for ESD, the RCE‘s work with First Nations and Métis communities, and the recognition and visibility provided these communities through the RCE‘s patron, theLieutenant Governor of Saskatchewan.
Lyle Benko and Roger Petry
Co-coordinators, RCE Saskatchewan

35

36

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		

Box 1.6
Critical Factors of Networking
Studies of organizational partnerships andnetworking indicate critical factors that canpotentially contribute to the success of collaborative undertakings (e.g. Bizer & Julich,
1999; Fadeeva & Halme, 2001; Weber, 1998).
Among those are: credible commitment, clarity of goals, clearly understood responsibilities, involvement of relevant stakeholders,setting of immediate targets, monitoring of
progress, and establishment of incentives.
These factors became some of the principles for guiding RCE candidates through anofficial acknowledgement process that was
introduced in 2006 to provide greater transparency and accountability as well as betterguidance to the candidates. The criteria for
acknowledgement of RCEs reflect many ofthese critical factors related to the composition of the networks as well as strategies ofpartnership development.

The Global RCE Service Centre at UNU-IAS facilitatesdevelopment of thematic networks for RCEs, suchas climate change, biodiversity, health, traditional
knowledge, sustainable consumption and production,and teacher education. The RCEs can propose newthemes to be jointly addressed by the global RCE community and call upon other RCEs to join their effort.
Interested RCEs then identify organizations with expertise in the thematic area (e.g. health) that are willingto take the lead in their regions. As a result, new partners enter the field of ESD and join the RCE networks
through different “thematic doors”.
More recent examples of such global mobilization are
also demonstrated by individual RCEs. In South Korea,
RCE Tongyeong offered leadership for thematic engagement under the umbrella of the Sejahtra project,supported by the Asia-Pacific Continental Platform. Sejahtra, which signifies sustainability in the Asia-Pacificregion, invites the RCEs to focus on nine priority
areas with the goal of strengthening partnershipand promoting ESD towards and beyond 2014. RCE
Tongyeong has established the Sejahtra Centre to serveas the facilitating entity of the project.

Bridging historical and institutional divides
The RCEs have demonstrated their potential to bring together partners that are historically or institutionally divided or that might benefit from the additional synergies among partners and sustainable development-related processes. RCE RhineMeuse served as a bridge between formal and informal education practitioners as well as, initially, among three countries that overlap its region. Throughfacilitating understanding of the role of education and learning vis-à-vis regionaland global sustainability actions, RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape paved theway for stronger engagement between ESD and sustainable development communities. In RCE Saskatchewan, development of new ESD models built arounddifferent forms of knowledge helped bring together urban and rural partners that
had not closely collaborated in the past. An example of such engagement is thework of university students with holders of traditional practices in a course inwhich learning from indigenous traditions was scientifically reflected and deliberated by both communities, resulting in understanding and deeper appreciationof such practices as well as exploring the ways of sustaining them. RCE Bogota is
consistently working on the organization of educational fora and workshops thatengage sectors of the population that are generally not covered by formal education. According to Olga Guerrero, coordinator of the RCE, “the RCE is … able toestablish a productive dialogue of knowledge between academia and the experience of common people to jointly create new knowledge about environment”.
RCE Lima Callao has created an innovative engagement between learning in indigenous communities and contemporary education in schools and universities.
The RCE has established a diploma course in which representatives of the indigenous communities participate as educators in university programs for higher
education students and the communities at large.

Part I

Linking theory and practice
A broad consensus exists on the notion that HEIs bear an important responsibility
for generating the knowledge base for finding solutions to society’s pressing problems. In addition to contributing, directly and indirectly, to technological advancement and policy development through basic and applied researches, HEI partners in
RCEs can undertake action-oriented research that emphasizes research and learning as a means of modifying or encouraging new action (including pedagogicalpractice in HEIs), rather than as a way of generating knowledge per se. In addition
to providing and enhancing outreach services to communities, HEIs can employ ascholarly approach to teaching and learning for SD. To achieve this, HEIs can use
action-oriented research to develop their own capacity to engage in transformative
ESD. While HEI partners in RCE efforts are employing action research to facilitate
the unfolding of change towards sustainable development, there is a growing realization of a real need for rigour in the scholarly engagement with practice in these
instititutions (see, for example, an analysis of competences in relation to change
and learning in the complex sociocultural and materials contexts presented in
Chapter 5.)
Learning for a sustainable future is best organized around a shared regional challenge. Action research can be understood as a way to locate learning within ongoing programs and projects in the region, and an RCE scheme gives HEIs an
ideal setting and necessary linkages to carry out action research effectively. Action
research on issues of immediate concern to local communities allows RCEs to explore locally appropriate innovative solutions while enhancing local stakeholders’
understanding of the local sustainability challenges and building their capacities
to address them.
The RCE initiative allows local stakeholders to identify and include the needs andinterests of a wide range of social groups in the region and combine a repertoireof resources that aid the promotion of ESD at the local level. A global network of
RCEs will combine these repertoires of resources and form a Global Learning
Space. In emerging thematic networks of RCEs, HEI partners are taking the leadin designing collaborative R&D projects across RCEs located on different continents. With the very nature of its work being one that transcends geographic
boundaries and is embedded in their regions as large-scale employers and purchasers of goods and services, HEIs are in a unique position to link global and local on
the one hand, and theory and action on the other. Institutions of higher learning
can play a critical role in turning RCEs into dynamic learning networks based onpractical application of theoretical knowledge and the dialectics of the global andthe local.
Whatever challenges a region faces, and however its RCE addresses these challen- RCE as
ges, the success of RCEs, individually and collectively, depends on the appropriate Coordinatorfacilitation and support of the network. According to Human & Provan (1997), two
dynamic aspects of a network structure, administrative and interactive, serve the
network in different ways. The two structures exist simultaneously but may develop
to different degrees in different networks. The administrative structure, which
includes lines of communication, guidelines for decisionmaking, and action, de-

37

38

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		livers specific objectives quickly and efficiently. The interactive structure – more
subtle and difficult to define – assists in delivering understanding and consensus,
particularly in the face of ambiguity.
The benefits of strong administrative coordination might be realized in a situationin which members compete for influence. In the case of RCEs, competition mightoccur over a particular activity or for overall influence in the network. Efficient
coordination is also helpful if the network partners represent organizations fromdifferent sectors (e.g. education, business or civil society) or have not had much
experience of prior collaboration. Stronger coordination may be needed in an areawith historically weak collaboration among institutions, but one must not forgetthat the roles of the RCEs are far broader than management of activities in a strict
controlling sense.
The RCEs support activity through communication and coordination, as well as
through assistance in conceptual development of the intra- and inter-RCE collaboration. With this in mind, the Global RCE Service Centre requires RCE candidates
to collectively define elements of the coordination structure at the initial stageof RCE mobilization. Of course, the initial structures may become modified androles redefined as RCEs develop. In their coordinating structures, RCEs demonstrate creative combinations of general rules and flexibility.
Early results showed that RCEs have indicated a potentiality of shifting powerfrom traditional regional governance models. For example, RCE Saskatchewan
noted that the decentralized working-group-oriented model of operation leads toleadership development among RCE members, in that they initiate and carry out
activities and participate in strategic decisions. This model is in contrast to traditional administrative top-down models of public and private organizations of theregion.
RCE Makana has viewed RCE practice as “experiments in social learning” after
Glasser (2007), to allow a critical engagement with globalizing narratives while
giving prominence to local small-scale experiments in change-oriented sustainability practices (Lotz-Sisitka et al., 2010). The experiments the RCE has implemented in small-scale change practices have provided a positive sense of creative
agency and change towards a more sustainable future.

RCEs as Facilitatorsof Social Learning
and Transformation

Recent decades have been characterized by uncertainties and a high reliance on
information, knowledge and innovation. Alongside the popularization of thelanguage of the knowledge economy, a discourse of “knowledge management”
has emerged, first, in the corporate sector and, more recently, in the work of development cooperation agencies (King and McGrath,2004). While some localities are experiencing rapid
Box 1.7
economic growth, others are struggling with underExamples of RCE Governance anddevelopment or stagnation. In both developed and deCoordination Strategies
veloping countries, changes are difficult to anticipate
and even more challenging to control. This situation
RCE Saskatchewan developed a managecalls for knowledge creation through active collective
ment and governance structure that takes
learning rather than prescriptive transfer of codified
cont.

Part I

advantage of both administrative and interactive elements. There are overarching rules
for man-agement of communication, agreed
general goals and objectives, strategies forfunding support and reporting. Decisionmaking, however, is not centralized. The RCE,from its inception, has employed a lightweight
structure of facilitative theme-based working
groups built on volunteerism with an intentional
strategy of modularity. Through this modular
and decentralized approach, the RCE‘s partner organizations commit to and take ownership of specific ESD projects while inviting
other RCE partner organizations and members
to participate. In this way resource costs required of the RCE are minimized. RCE partnerorganizations, in turn, see themselves as theRCE, as opposed to the RCE being viewed asa separate organizational structure. As such,they see themselves as part of a regional movement for ESD in Saskatchewan. (R. Petry)
The work of planning and carrying out thedifferent educational forums and workshops
by RCE Bogota is collaborative, cooperative
and accomplished through an interdisciplinary
team of RCE members. Until now there havebeen 40 such forums and workshops, with anaverage attendance of 200 participants per
event. This is the strategy that holds together
sustainability and ESD actions in the region,
especially as such events engage a percentageof the population that is generally not taken
into account as part of formal education. The
RCE is able to establish a productive dialogueof knowledge between academia and the experience of common people to jointly create
new knowledge about the environment. (O-M
Bermúdez Guerrero)In the case of RCE Greater Western Sydney, adelegate of each partner forms the Steering
Committee with a revolving system in which
each of the key collaborators takes a two-year
turn holding governance and administrative
responsibilities. Continuous quality tracking
and documentation of improvements becamea key strategy for RCE coordination. It helps
the stakeholders see how the RCE and theimpact of its work look like in practice. It also

helps them make sense of what they are doing
and see the bigger picture of RCE operations
and where their work fits in. (G. Scott)
The Okayama ESD Promotion Commission wasformed as a governing body of RCE Okayama. It consists of the Commission Council, theSteering Committee and the Secretariat (Cityof Okayama), and undertakes significant roles
in formulating the basic direction of the Okayama ESD Project – designing and supporting
ESD activities in the region, promoting cooperation and interaction among organizations
involved in ESD, as well as performing liaisonand coordination duties. The Commission
identifies and designates priority organizations
as core members of RCE Okayama, which
include local schools (elementary, middle
and high schools), universities, Kominkan (community learning centres), NGOs, civil society
organizations, local media, and the private sector. The number of priority organizations, starting with 48 when RCE Okayama was established in 2005, steadily grew to 166 by theend of 2013. The priority organizations, while
carrying out ESD projects, are mentored andsupported by the core organizations, and intermediately support organizations that have expertise and competencies in ESD. Setting a formal mechanism in place, RCE Okayama forms
an inclusive and flexible network that allows
participation of a diverse group of new actors.
(S. Yasuda)
RCE Penang has a council of RCE stakeholder
representatives, with an Eminent Persons
Group and a Specific Taskforce for identified
issues alongside the Council. An Operational
Taskforce provides for implementation of thesustainability and education dimensions ofprograms. (M. Ghazali)
At RCE Waikato the engagement with potential collaborators proceeded through face-toface meetings backed up with information.
Discussion with Māori partners was a priority,
both in tribal communities and in the university. Partnership and collaboration may be expressed through different governance options
an example of recognizing the indigenous.
cont.

39

40

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		knowledge. Ultimately, it requires relations based on partnerships for collectively
sharing, generating and testing rather than the traditional principles of efficiency
and control attributed to a hierarchical community. The concept that best characterizes such partnerships is “community of practice” (Lave and Wenger, 1991;
Wenger, 1998).
As outlined earlier and through interactions with local stakeholders’ responses
to the RCE strategy, the UNU conceptualization of RCEs has changed over time.
Some local promoters of RCEs came to characterize RCEs in ways that were notoriginally intended. At one end of the spectrum of RCE interpretations is theimage of an RCE as a hub to promote ESD, a meeting point, a link point, a clearinghouse, a knowledge broker, and a platform for
information exchange and sharing. This is close tostatus of Māori in the RCE governance structhe initial UNU conceptualization of an RCE, whichture, along with representatives of other colserves the purposes of knowledge management,laborator organizations.
knowledge transfer, and delivery of ESD to the community. Such conceptualization tends to focus on
In the context of Aotearoa, New Zealand, forthe technological aspects of knowledge sharing such
example, a principle for partnership is to inas database development and website construction,
volve Māori in governance or in a way thatalong with face-to-face communication.
accords with indigenous partner interests andpriorities. Possibilities include establishing a
At the other end of the spectrum is the interpretation
Māori Advisory Council to sit alongside a govof an RCE as a community of practice, an institutional
ernance Board representing collaborators.
mechanism for social learning and a learning netThis model may be implemented throughwork. In contrast with the knowledge transfer model,
a Memorandum of Understanding, so thatwhich emphasizes the role of knowledge-related instithe Māori Advisory Council is involved fortutions, the social learning model views RCEs as sites
agreed-upon matters such as decisions about
for learning, presupposing the existence of conflicts
access to the Waikato River (a major featureof interests and views among different stakeholdersof Māori territorial interests), and specialist
and seeing the potential of a network in the very fact
initiatives, such as in law for sustainability andthat each partner contributes differing perspectives toengagement in policy development.
the network.
A further model is to structure Māori representation on the governing board. A board
with 50 per cent representation of Māori issometimes proposed as a counterweight tothe dominance of introduced democratic systems. All of these are aspirations of RCEs; however there are systems underway to addressthese challenges that need to be respected.
No doubt there will be convergences as RCE
programs take shape. (B. Martin)

If the emphasis of the knowledge transfer model is thedissemination of existing knowledge, the emphasisof the social learning model is the creation of new
knowledge through active, contextually groundedlearning. At this stage of development, many RCEs
are still in the process of taking an inventory of
ESD-related activities in their respective regions andmapping expertise and resources to be shared among
the partners. RCE evaluations unfolding around theglobe are the testament to this process (see Chapter 7
for more details). While improving technological aspects of knowledge sharing remains a major challenge for many RCEs as well as
for the Global RCE Service Centre, RCEs are encouraged to look also at social aspects of knowledge sharing. Both the partners of individual RCEs and the networkof RCEs can be understood as forming not only knowledge management systems
but also communities of practice, which share a commitment to ESD, interact andlearn together, and develop a shared repertoire of resources that facilitate action
for a sustainable future.

Part I

There is no denying that development of the theory and practice of knowledge
management has served as one cornerstone of situated and local capabilitycentred sociocultural practices deliberations in some RCEs. Based on the jointly
identified challenges of the region, as well as an understanding of ongoing efforts
and an agreement on joint actions, the RCE partners engage in change-oriented
practices. Established RCEs demonstrate evolution of actions and governancein the course of a collective search for the RCE role in their regions. The RCEs
become an interface between local and global actions and strategies struggling
to make sense of dominant and evolving discourses and probing power structures, economic models and development frameworks (Lotz-Sisitka et al., 2010).
Knowledge exchange and generation evolve around actions designed to address
an RCE’s goals, while peer reviews and research-based reflexivity are embedded
in its actions and experimentation.
Evolution of the RCE concept does not mean that a single understanding of the con- Coexistence of
cept or associated practices prevails in different regions. Rather, different notions Different Models
are preferred and govern praxes of the stakeholders. Mobilization might be taken and Understandings
as the key RCE function where collaborative alliances around a sustainability
agenda or questions of education are not well developed. Coordination could be
more appreciated where partners of several blooming initiatives search greatersynergies. Collective learning and transformation might come or emerge as an
evolving appreciation of diversity and learning as a strategy of change.
Coexistence of different perspectives is clearly acknowledged by the RCE community as a strength, securing not only potential for cross-fertilization but also resilience of the sustainability solutions coming from the RCE network as a whole.
In April 2006 UNU-IAS organized an International RCE Conference in Yokoha- Development ofma, Japan. More than 100 participants, mainly representatives of acknowledged a Global Network
RCEs and RCE candidates and experts, gathered at the conference, exchanged of RCEs
their experiences and held thematic discussions on issues related to RCE development, such as networking and collaboration among RCEs. To make the processof acknowledging RCEs transparent and accountable, the Ubuntu Alliance, in its
meeting held in conjunction with this conference, established a Committee ofPeers for the RCEs to discuss ways to promote RCEs, to review applications andprovide recommendations to UNU on acknowledgement of new RCEs. Today there
is a formal process to apply to become an RCE and the process is open to all interested parties. Furthermore, UNU-IAS has established a Global RCE Service
Centre to provide assistance to individual RCEs and facilitate communication andnetworking with and among them. With the expansion of RCEs across the world,both geographic and thematic networks of RCEs have been established. From
2008, as the result of an RCE-driven process, several thematic areas have been
complemented by collaborative strategic and operational discussions (Box 1.8).
As the formal process to become an RCE is established and the number of RCEs
increases, there are more and more calls for the Global RCE Service Centre to assist
in strengthening the intra- and inter-RCE linkages and clarify the benefits of being
part of the RCE community. UNU-IAS, in its capacity as the Global RCE Service

41

42

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices		

Box 1.8
Thematic, Strategic and Operational
Areas of Collaborative Work of RCEs
• Climate Change and ESD• Health and ESD• Teacher Education and Better Schools• Sustainable Consumption and Production(SCP) and Sustainable Livelihoods andWell-being• Youth and ESD• Higher Education• Traditional Knowledge and ESD• Biodiversity and ESD• Disaster Risk Reduction and ESD• Inclusive Development and Learning• Capacity Development• Appraisal of RCEs
• Research and Development• Governance and Coordination• Engagement with Policymakers• Fundraising and Marketing• Communications and Outreach• Engagement with International
Sustainability ProcessesCentre, has increasingly encouraged RCEs to set up
geographic sub-networks of RCEs as well as engage
them in carrying out R&D collaboratively to createa Global Learning Space, understood as co-engaged
learning among RCEs and between RCEs and othercommunities of learning and practice. The Global
RCE Service Centre, however, does not play a strong
coordination role in promoting networking among
RCEs at the national, subregional, regional and international levels or around particular themes. Rather, it
attempts to provide guidance and encourages some
RCEs to take the lead in facilitating collaboration
among RCEs both geographically and around specificthematic issues, such as teacher training, sustainable
use of energy, sustainable production and consumption, and sustainable health.
RCEs recognize their unique position as grassroots
multistakeholder networks, with distinctive capacities
for research and innovation that can revitalize education at all levels through flagship projects. As regionally based yet globally connected networks, RCEs
form a global learning space on ESD, working to ensure that all individuals have the opportunity to learn
the values, behaviours and lifestyles required for a

Part I

Reflections

The concept of communities of practice was rapidly popularized
and its populist appropriations abound today, but it does notnegate the value of this concept in ESD/RCE efforts. Wenger(1998, pp. 51-71) emphasizes the duality of a community ofpractice – it has both a designed and emergent nature, a local
and global character, identification and negotiability of issues,and participation and reification within it – which resonateswith the RCE community.

43

44

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		

Reflections

Why do I stay with the RCE network even though
I have already been retired for five years?
• Because the RCE network is the only global network that I know of in the fieldof ESD working so decisively at the grassroots level, avoiding an overflow of bureaucratic procedures and traditions.
• Because RCEs and the RCE network rely on individuals and their personal driveand enthusiasm instead of being only an institutional network. Continuity in thesense of institutional sustainability will always be given attention in the RCE network. I want to contribute to this.
• Because the RCE community has a talent for attracting wonderful and dedicatedpeople!
• Because I am aware of the continuous changes in visions and strategies that exist

at many RCEs, due to the changing needs of regions. This may need the continuous
participation of people like me, who keep organizational memories of the past.
• Because I see a huge potential for this network in the future, and I want to contributeto it. I hope that we will continue to understand the opportunities and the needs inthe field of ESD in every individual home region. I want to contribute to the work at
the grassroots level. I consider this our unique selling point, which will distinguishus from all other initiatives.
		

Jos Hermans, RCE Europe advisor

Part I

sustainable future and for positive social transformation. Its gradual maturing encouraged the RCE movement and its facilitating agencies to further engage with
communities representing sustainability and ESD policies and practices, forming
various clusters of engagement. Such work, however challenging, together withthe capacity development of the RCE community, presents the key strategic direction for the future (see Part II for more in-depth reflections on the vision of theRCE community).

References
Bizer, K. and R. Julich. (1999). Voluntaryagreements – trick or treat? European Environment,
9 (2), 59-66.
Dahms, T., McMartin, D. & Petry, R. (2010). Saskatchewan‘s (Canada) regional centre of expertiseon education for sustainable development. Journalof Education for Sustainable Development, 4 (1), 51-59.
Doyle, A. & Foy, M. (2010). RCE North East culture
as the means to goodwill. Journal of Education for
Sustainable Development, 4 (1), 105-115.
Fadeeva, Z. (2007). From centre of excellence tocentre of expertise: Regional centres of expertise on
education for sustainable development. In A.E.J.
Wals (Ed.), Social learning towards a sustainable world:
Principles, perspectives, and praxis (pp. 245-264).
Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Fadeeva, Z. & Halme M. (Eds). (2001).
EMPOST-NET. Emerging paradigm of sustainable
tourism: A network perspective. Final Project Report,
IIIEE Report 2001:4. University of Lund, Sweden:
International Institute for Industrial Environmental
Economics.

Fadeeva, Z. & Mochizuki, Y. (2007). Regional centres of expertise: Innovative networking for education
for sustainable development. Journal of Education for
Sustainable Development, 1 (2), 229-37.
Glasser, H. (2007). Minding the gap: The role ofsocial learning in linking our stated desire for amore sustainable world to our everyday actions andpolicies. In A.E.J.Wals, (Ed.). Social learning: Towards
a sustainable world (pp. 35-61). Wageningen:Wageningen University Press.
Hopkins, C., McKeown, R. & Van Ginkel, H. (2005).
Challenges and roles for higher education in promoting sustainable development. In Mobilising for
education for sustainable development: Towards a global
learning space based on Regional Centres of Expertise(pp. 13-21). Yokohama: UNU-IAS.
Human, S.E. & Provan, K.G. (1997). An emerging
theory of structure and outcomes in small-firm
strategic manufacturing networks. Academy ofManagement Journal, 40 (2), 368-402.

45

46

Chapter 1 Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development:
Evolution of Concept and Practices

		Keen, M., Brown, V.A. & Dyball, R. (2005). Social
learning in environmental management: Towards asustainable future. Sterling, VA.: Earthscan.

UNESCAP. (2003). Regional follow-up to the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Asia and thePacific. Italy: United Nations Publications.

King, K. & McGrath, S. (2004). Knowledge for development? Comparing British, Japanese, Swedish andWorld Bank aid. London and New York: Zed Books;
Cape Town: HSRC Press.

UNESCO. (2005).United Nations Decade of Educationfor Sustainable Development (2005-2014) International
Implementation Scheme. Paris: UNESCO.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

UNU (2004). Regional Centres of Expertise on
Education for Sustainable Development: Concept paper.
Tokyo: UNU-IAS.

Lotz-Sisitka, H., O’Donoghue, R. & Wilmot, D.
(2010). The Makana Regional Centre of Expertise:
Experiments in social learning. Journal of Educationfor Sustainable Development, 4 (1), 73-92.

UNU-IAS. (2005). Mobilising for education for sustainable development: Towards a global learning space
based on Regional Centres of Expertise. Yokohama:
UNU-IAS.

Rikers, J.H.A.N. & Hermans, H.C.L.M. (2008).
Regional Centre of Expertise (RCE) Rhine-Meuse:
Across-border network. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, 9 (4), 441-449.

Weber, E. P. (1998). Successful collaboration:
Negotiating effective regulations. Environment, 40(9), 5-10.

Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations andorganisational context as predictors of corporatechoice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (4), 681-97.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Part I47

48

Part II RCEs: The Present

Part II
RCEs: The Present

RCEs work continuously on a system that offers an opportunity for inclusionand collective reflection, and processes enabling the redesigning of goals, roles
and actions for development – a system that can potentially address the fragmentation of the sustainable development agenda. Part II raises the following
questions: What happened since the RCE concept began capturing the attention of regional champions 10 years ago, resulting in the acknowledgment of
129 initiatives? What results, learning and aspirations does the RCE concept
bring? How can it capture the complexity of this global initiative, going beyond
predefined and external expectations?
Building on the characteristics of RCEs described in Part I, Chapter 2 explores
these further as well as the processes associated with RCE collaborations. It
also explores the characteristics and processes in relation to the development
focus. Going beyond normative postulates of the RCE concept, the chapter also
brings to the fore the challenges of sustaining and increasing actions of RCEs,
while expanding partner engagement. Once the initial hurdles of network consolidation and acknowledgement have been addressed, the chapter explores
the effort to shift from collective projects to processes and to assessing the
RCE’s own efforts.
Chapters 2, 3, and 4 explore interconnections between multistakeholder learning initiatives and global sustainability processes, taking as examples issues of

49

biodiversity and traditional knowledge (Chapter 3) and sustainable consumption
and production (Chapter 4). RCE contributions to policy development throughengagement with policymakers, and influencing development and implementation of sustainability and ESD programs and projects are further elaborated
upon, with reference to many examples in Chapter 6.
Stepping out of the popular discourse of competences, Chapter 5 takes a criticallook at transformative learning against the backdrop of the competences framework popular within the ESD community. It examines more open-ended, situated and reflexive learning unfolding within the RCEs – learning that is aseffective for addressing complexity of sustainability as it is for mobilizing communities.
Evaluation of sustainability is a complex challenge, overlaid with ideological discussions on the consideration of goals, players and results of such a process. It
is particularly complex when one deals with the effects of learning. The efficacyof RCE actions and their impacts are contingent upon the RCE, and the global
RCE community at large, being strong, resilient and having the wherewithal
for engagement, thus enabling evaluation. This topic is discussed in Chapter
7; the chapter narrates the foundations of the RCE evaluation approach as aprocess of collective learning through self-assessment, a process that, being
imperative and facilitative, leads to empowerment of the RCEs and the regions.

50

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		Part II

Chapter 2

Capacities and Learning forMultistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development
Zinaida Fadeeva and Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana

This chapter demonstrates how sustainability aspirations and ESD principlesof the RCE community, as well as some of their strategies and projects, contribute to the development of capacities of the regions to address the complex risksof sustainability while contracting some of the challenges of development.
RCEs, being cross-sectoral and multidisciplinary networks, develop learninginterventions informed not only by a variety of perspectives but also principles
that preclude pre-designed answers and short-term solutions. Through theirlocal, national and international linkages, they open spaces and draw inspirations from various and often unexpected fields. They deal with competences
and capabilities in the context of regional learning including those that arenecessary for developing and sustaining multistakeholder partnerships of sustainable development (SD) and ESD. Though the ideas explored in the chapter are based on field level experiences and case studies and not a theoreticalnarration of capacity development, they have been refined through an interand intra-RCE sharing and learning process. Such experiences have been codified, experts have been identified and capacity development tools have beendeveloped systematically on strategic and thematic areas. Let us explore theseexperiences and ideas in greater depth.

51

52

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		Addressing
Fragmentation of
the Development
AgendaThe sustainable development agenda in local contexts remains fragmented owing
to the complexity of development challenges and, often, the specialized sectoral
or disciplinary interventions. Some criticisms of development efforts shed lighton the lack of coordination that results in development challenges being treatedseparately and, as a result, disregard critical synergies that exist among them.
The problem was well identified early on in SD discussions, both at the level ofglobal policymaking as well as in the context of local practices. In Our Common
Future (WECD, 1987, para 75), the chapter titled “Towards Sustainable Development” states:… inter sectoral connections create patterns of economic and ecological interdependence rarely reflected in the ways in which policy is made. Sectoral organizations tend to pursue sectoral objectives and to treat their impacts on othersectors as side effects, taken into account only if compelled to do so. Hence impacts on forests rarely worry those involved in guiding public policy or businessactivities in the fields of energy, industrial development, crop husbandry, or
foreign trade. Many of the environment and development problems that confront us have their roots in this sectoral fragmentation of responsibility. Sustainable development requires that such fragmentation be overcome.
The document goes on to say that the problems in a complex system of cause andeffect cannot be handled in compartments by fragmented policies or institutions
working in silos.
Many years later, the challenge remains. For example, a compelling cross-sectoral
analysis of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by the Lancet Commission
pointed out that with narrowly defined and fragmented goals of the MDGs “thepotential linkages and synergies that exist between sectors proved difficult to exploit” (Lancet Commission, 2010, p. 7). The authors of the report further pointed
out that “convergence is made less likely by the reality that goals are compartmentalised into responsibilities of different line ministries nationally, subnationallyand locally” (ibid, p. 9).
In such a milieu, the cross-sectoral, multistakeholder and multidisciplinary educational interventions, through local and regional networking and their verticallinkages with both national and international perspectives and goals, become
imperative. This not only creates opportunities for more coherent work on SD
issues but also opens spaces for collective reflections and consolidation of local
action. Opening of such spaces creates additional opportunities for inclusion
where agenda and roles of partners can be renegotiated, avoiding conventional
institutional constraints. Though challenging, such integration is an evolving anddynamic process, the progression of which is highly linked to collective learning,both social as well as problem-based, through a systematic process grounded in
ESD principles. This not only warrants specific capacities of shared governancebut also negotiating through multiple and diverse value positions of partners.
Innovation embedded in the RCE idea relates to the establishment of a crosssectoral partnership and coordinating structure to pursue a range of issues rather
than leaving individual challenges to the partners who, traditionally, take responsibility for these issues.

Part II

RCEs have demonstrated how, through their work, a
Box 2.1
broader developmental focus springs to life. Having
Information and Activities required for
productive livelihoods addressing individual as well as
Recognition of the RCEs
societal needs and overall well-being, while assuring(Adapted from the instructive document,
conservation and the sustainable and equitable use
UNU-IAS1)of resources, is the foundational premise of development understood and collectively agreed to by the RCE• Analysis of the major characteristics of a recommunity. Understanding of the interconnections
gion – environmental, sociocultural, demobetween the knowledge history and resources to adgraphical, economic, educational – and its
vance more sustainable production and consumption
main sustainable development challenges.
systems is seen, for example, in RCE Lucknow, and in• Clear and specific RCE vision, long-term
RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape (Chapter 4). In
and short-term objectives, strategies, andthe activities facilitated by these RCEs, people are given
scenarios to achieve the vision and objectiopportunities to enhance their livelihood beyondves.
market options that are immediately available to them
• Governance and management, including
while negotiating regulations that govern current livelievidence of a mobilization process tohood activities. Actions of RCEs Vienna, Greater Westdevelop the RCE, commitment of key
ern Sydney, Delhi and Hamburg seek development
stakeholders, identification of the RCE’sof entrepreneurial skills that facilitate sustainable
governance principles and managementbusinesses, promote more sustainable products, or
structure, resource arrangements, and asaddress running a business in environmentally sensessment strategies.
sitive locations. Such capacity development empow• Identified collaboration among regionalers future entrepreneurs by exposing them simultaand local stakeholders, including involveneously to the fields of business, development andment of higher education institutions, local
sustainability, as well as to the respective knowledge
schools, non-formal and informal educacommunities – something that is not often combinedtion stakeholders, and those from otherin the conventional practices of entrepreneurial desectors, as well as identified joint activities
velopment. Similarly, encouragement of sustainable
among the partners.
lifestyles also benefits from bringing together areas of
action and from finding synergies among the various
fields, which often fail to be explored. These areas, forexample, relate, on one hand, to one’s ability to consume and to earn market income
and, on the other hand, to critically influence, as a consumer, management of the
product or selection of the service. Ability to address broader areas of relevance forlivelihood, ecosystems and development of human potential were demonstrated,among others, by RCEs Saskatchewan, Greater Phnom Penh and KwaZulu Natal(Chapters 3 and 4).
Multiple projects form RCE portfolios across the globe, of which we mention justa few, showing how cross-sectoral consortia in the localities create opportunities
for more coherent work with SD issues, including with complex constellations ofrisks, are illustrated in greater depth in the following chapters (Chapters 3, 4 and5).
We argue that preconditions for bridging an intrinsically fragmented development
agenda comes from several factors that govern the work of RCEs. To begin with,an RCE’s goals and ambitions emerge as a result of multistakeholder consultation

1 http://archive.ias.unu.edu/resource_centre/Guidelines%20for%20RCE%20applications_1.pdf

53

54

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		at the stage of mobilization (Box 2.1), where partners are required to collectively
define the goals and link them to development priorities of the region and/or
country. The process of RCE mobilization is seen, in itself, as an empowering andenabling process where partners receive an opportunity, supported by legitimacyof the larger global RCE network and by the presence of UN supporters, to respond to the regional challenges in different and potentially more innovative ways.
As shared by RCEs Waikato and Portland (Box 2.2), mobilizations highlighted, interalia, importance of shared values and vision, accepted governance principles andcareful strategizing and planning – principles that become key insights into continuous operations of the RCEs. Mobilization helps partners understand the challenges of ongoing approaches to sustainability in terms of their importance (“thevision of sustainability has been devalued particularly by some sectors” RCE Waikato) or approach (prioritization of sectoral actions), finding appropriate strategies(“finding a compromise between stakeholders focusing on (initial) clarification ofconcepts and missions and those wishing to move more quickly into implementation” RCE Portland) and identifying modalities of collaboration.
While mobilization under the RCE guiding principles itself appears to be offering
opportunities for collective learning and experimentation, the mentorship modelof support from the established candidates provides additional ideas and insights
to the leaders of emerging RCEs. For example, the shared experience of RCE Greater Western Sydney has helped to resolve, in the case of RCE Waikato, some initialchallenges with respect to shared resources, ambitions and strategies – elementsthat have to be considered afresh when applied to thegoals and agendas going beyond individual organizaBox 2.2
tional boundaries.
Challenges and Lessons of Mobilization
A quick insight into the stage of mobilization for more
RCE Greater Portland
integrated collaborative sustainability actions provides
RCE Greater Portland is a new and growing
an understanding that emergence of a joint sustainacross-sectoral network of 80 colleges, school
bility agenda still may not be sufficient unless deeper
districts, non-profits, governments and incollaborative processes, a different collective focus, or
dustry partners committed to education fora set of joint principles come into play. Some RCEs
sustainable development in the greater Porthave demonstrated how overarching goals assure
land region. From environmental educationthat engagement across partners’ agendas is done
alliances and the Oregon Zoo, to social suswith a genuine understanding of regional issues. In
tainability groups and green architecture asthese cases, themes such as those presented by thesociations, Portland has a plethora of active
examples of RCE Gothenburg or Pune emerge, withsustainability groups. This offers both opporthe partners focusing on qualitatively new goals –tunities and challenges in our developmentchange of regional culture towards a more sustainable
and mobilization process.
one (RCE Gothenburg) or pursuit of new forms of collaborative governance across the board (RCE Pune).
While we have the advantage of not having
As a result, partners aspire to step out of pre-formuto create a lot of new programs from scratch,
lated agendas into more integrated actions, which is,
we face a challenge to develop a container
ultimately, a critical innovation. Chapter 1 highlighted
big enough to convene and support thesome of the strategies the individual RCEs as well as
many groups in the region. Given that there
their international partners such as UNU-IAS employ
are many existing sustainability coalitions andto sustain ongoing engagement beyond the initial moleaders, we have to be careful to honour andbilization processes.
cont.

Part II

respect the good work already in place. We
offer a nexus for collaboration and crosspollination, and strive to not violate anygroup’s sense of ownership of mission, identity
or geography.
We have, therefore, tried to offer a variety of
stakeholder events and have done a great
deal of outreach to diverse groups to identify
shared goals and projects, which align with
regional research and sustainability plans. We
have found success in conversations that support win-win models that build on regional
objectives and help implement organizational and institutional sustainability education
goals. Collaboratively, we have developed avision to “create a healthy, just, and thriving
region where sustainability education is prioritized and integrated across sectors; and where
everyone has opportunities to shape a moresustainable future”. We are committed to innovative education, transformative researchand hands-on learning for all. We plan to help
do an asset analysis of the region, create acomprehensive resource inventory and offer
engaging projects based on the needs of thecommunity.
During RCE Greater Portland’s development
and mobilization process, we have learned
many lessons. The urgency and enthusiasm wefelt to establish partnerships, complete our application and begin addressing regional challenges, capitalized on existing expertise andopened doors to immediate collaboration. We
also discovered varying group dynamics due todifferent preferences for organizational styles,
with distinctions between process and action.
There were some who recommended taking
more time to talk about concepts and think
through our mission and strategies before
taking actions, while others wanted to move
more quickly into implementation. Finding abalance between the different styles took time,
as both are important. We chose to establish
a baseline of goals and ethics and began totake some actions while working on clarifying
our strategic plan. Having the opportunity toengage in some concrete projects facilitatedparticipation, allowed us to pilot some mo-dels, and demonstrated our contributions tothe community, while integrating reflection on
how efforts can be improved. (K. Smith)
RCE Waikato
The Waikato experience of mobilization offers
a number of key insights. They include the importance of an ethical foundation, the primacyof partnering with Māori, and of the importance of building kaupapa (Māori principles) into
governance and programs. For effective collaboration, face-to-face engagement is a priority, and shared leadership (in our case RESPONSE, which is an independent organization,and Waikato Management School) brings
greater capacity for negotiation for ensuring ashared vision and for ensuring that partner interests are represented. Collaboration offers ameans of responding to the opportunities thatare calling for action, to challenges to be overcome and to the practicalities of delivering on
the vision.
Collaboration: Value-added benefit
and negotiated goals
Collaborative work is a lodestar of sustainability.
Collaboration is more easily achieved for a single issue, such as freshwater, than the rich visionof working together across a constellation of
sectors and disciplines as matters of practice.
The leadership team from the University ofWaikato and RESPONSE met face-to-facewith Māori groups and with each of theorganizations we approached for collaboration.
Twenty-five organizations were represented
at the round-table event to discuss the valueadded dimensions of the potential RCE, andsome of the main aspects were as follows:• The approach of sustainability is supported
but there is recognition that the vision ofsustainability has been devalued particularly by some sectors that are predominately
accountable to their stakeholders for shortterm outputs.
• Working with an ethics of responsibility
brings a clarifying framework to education
for sustainable development and support tothe paradigm of transformation in education.
Responsibility refers to accountability, in thecont.

55

56

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development		sense of giving an account of the human andenvironmental effects and impacts of economic activity. It also means responsiveness,with the relational dimensions of interdependence, the sense of shared destiny, andof human contribution to the well-being of
the planet.
• Professional development for transformativeeducation across sectors and disciplines isseen as beneficial and necessary as this is
not an area regularly included in the general educational curriculum, nor resourced by
the State.
• The statutory framework of regional andlocal government is oriented to environmental data sets, and RCE Waikato is seen
as bringing additional capability to the data
fields, especially the social and economic
areas.
• The global network of RCEs is seen as beneficial for the university, which places highvalue on international academic linkages.
Two members of the leadership team visited
RCE Greater Western Sydney as part of the
preparatory process. This visit was a great opportunity to see the value-added dimensions
that are evident in the farm restoration projectat the Hawkesbury River, which involves building skills, technology, agriculture, indigenous
involvement and river restoration. We notedthat funding opportunities are enhanced by
the RCE platform.
The value-added quality of collaboration
comes from shared goals that help to transcendorganizational self interest, a clear articulationof specific activities which are difficult to achievealone, access to a wider constituency of expertise, and the benefit of greater impact.
Addressing Challenges
The RCE Waikato round-table meeting showed both possibilities and tensions in collaboration; tensions came from different perspectives and organizational interests. These arethemselves the seeds for learning and productive engagement. Collaboration is timeintensive, needs commitment to long-term
engagement, and requires leadership.

Round-table participants posed the questionof resourcing, including funds, leadership andinstitutional resourcing such as an office andinformation technology (IT) support. The interest of organizations in an RCE is tempered byquestions of funding. It was helpful to refer to
RCE Greater Western Sydney’s experience ofthe effectiveness of the RCE platform for raising funds for projects. RESPONSE and theManagement School of the university contributed funds for preparation of the proposal. A
good deal of voluntary time and expertise wasalso given.
Learning
Careful planning with a strategy for collaborator engagement is important. Collaboration
requires significant skills of interpersonal respect and the ability to manage differences ofviews constructively. When bringing a larger
group together, as in our round-table, skilledfacilitation is important – with an emphasis on
appreciation for all contributions, respect fordifferent views and priorities, and ability tosteer creatively forward.
Value of the Mobilization Process
Presenting a proposal to collaborate to theuniversity, local government and community
organizations, schools and businesses is a demanding process. We tapped into a profoundinterest in transformations to sustainability that
few organizations are resourced to mobilize.
The mobilizing process establishes a base to
anticipate collaborative endeavours and alter
competitive processes. The preparatory process lays the ground for activating collaborative programs.
While the importance of collaborative governance is widely acknowledged, there are few
examples of effective practice. We are starting
research on collaborations. With the advantage
of drawing on the experience of other RCEs,
we look forward to implementing collaborative
governance and providing a case study to beshared with other organizations. (B. Martin andthe leadership team of RCE Waikato)

Part II

While the volunteerism approach of RCEs (Chapter 10) makes them flexible in Fostering Sharedaddressing the issues of shared goals, value divergence among partners is a key Goals and Value
challenge in building multistakeholder partnerships. The challenge emerges Systemfrom the fact that the ideologies and motives may vary among diverse actors suchas academics, civil society organizations, state departments and businesses. At thesame time, creation of a collective identity and co-creation of knowledge throughinter-organizational networking (duties, rights, entitlements etc.) also present a demanding undertaking.
Box 2.3
Internalizing the need for collective action as a netWorking Together at RCE Tongyeong
worked community engaged in diverse social learning(By Won Byun)
and change initiatives and identifying shared framesof reference on local issues are the first steps towards
Regular monthly meetings of the citizen
this.
education committee and school education committee create the core of the comFormulation of the overarching goals, as has beenmunication platform for RCE members inpointed out in the previous section, could be a step
Tongyeong.
towards finding synergies. At the same time, thisalso demands a more practical engagement; sharing
The citizen education committee is a network
resources such as information, human, finance, andof governmental and non-governmental instiproduced resources from a shared value position istutions working on informal education. The
clearly a dynamic and evolving process. The challencommittee, which was formed in 2006 with 17
ge is not to lose partners and to expand networking
organizations, by April 2014 had 38 diverse
based on the contextual needs. For the alliance to be
education institutes that are dedicated to
productive it is also necessary to have shared princire-orienting existing programs and building
ples of learning and transformation. A pluralisticallya creative network for ESD. Through monthly
grounded ideology is the core of sustaining the partmeetings and seasonal workshops, netnerships apart from working towards mutual social,
work organizations share information, study
environmental and economic incentives for collective
together and organize joint initiatives such
efforts. Continuous dialogue and intra-RCE commuas the annual “SaengSaeng Civil Education
nication, core elements in sustaining partnerships,
Cooperative Project“ and “Refresh! Sum,
need to be nurtured. In the RCE network context,
Shim, Sam Capacity Building Project” forthough the network came into existence as part ofeducators. Through the ESD Model School
the DESD, RCEs and partners to a great extent haveproject, RCE Tongyeong developed an ESD
moved beyond the idea of a project mode. In such acurriculum from kindergarten to university
move, relations among the partners and eventuallylevel between 2006 and 2011. Since 2011,
emerging trust and respect enable continuation of
in partnership with the Tongyeong Office of
RCE activities (Box 2.3).
Education, at least two teachers are designated as ESD focal point teachers in every
school in Tongyeong, from kindergarten to
Development of the SD and ESD
high school, at the beginning of every school
Competences and Capabilities
year. The School Education Network, which
consists of these ESD focal point teachers
Developing ESD as well as thematic competences thatand retired teachers, promotes ESD prodeal with the ability of learners to think, do, act andgrams, develops teaching materials and orlive together, all while focusing on the education ofganizes teacher-training courses during every
educators who are to facilitate such competences, issummer and winter holidays.
critical (Box 2.4). The RCEs are not only cross-sectoral
consortia focused on resilient and equitable sustainAlthough these organizational frames proable development but also address challenges of theirvide a stable platform for networking, theregions through learning unfolding around compecont.

57

58

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development		core elements in sustaining intra-RCE partnership are mutual trust and committed
leadership of the core members. Since 2005
when RCE Tongyeong began, there have beentimes when the freshness of networking seemed to have waned, or differences seemed
greater than our shared vision. However,proven by the growing number of participants and despite imminent challenges, thestrength of commitment still lives on over a
glass of soju. tences of sustainability and ESD. That becomes themain argument for the potentiality of RCEs to secure
convergence of sustainability and a learning agenda.
Discussion of competences would not be complete
without a discussion of capabilities grounded on theidea of choice (Sen, 1999) that, in the context of ESD,
lead not only by the narrowly understood notion of
personal well-being but the idea of change for the benefit of society as a whole – the idea of societal justice.
In the context of RCEs, change is seen as a learning
process, an act of political engagement and mobilization (Box 2.4). It is through co-engaged learning of
RCEs addressing a host of problems of particular regions, that competences become capabilities. In other words, the RCEs give competences an opportunity to be re-enacted towards transformation while addressing the regional challenges in a holistic manner (see Chapter 5 for more detailed
thinking behind relations of competences, learning and transformation towards
more sustainable development).

Box 2.4
Capabilities as freedom(By Jim Taylor, RCE KwaZulu Natal)
Supporting the whole person is very relevantto the enabling support we try to provide.
This leads to thoughts and questions aroundcompetencies and capabilities. Competencies are compelling outcomes of learning. Although one may be competent at something,
one may not be able to exercise one’s competence at the home or at the workplace. Often
people are declared competent at university
but then cannot engage that competence (orcannot do it competently) in the workplace.
Amartya Sen (1999) develops the notion ofcapabilities that are a bit broader and throughwhich one can develop and respond to thechallenges one might face, but these are often
unpredictable. One also needs to be reflexive
and respond in different ways in different
circumstances. “Responsibility” here is fromthe “ability to respond”. Capabilities seek to
acknowledge the entirety of what a person
is capable of being and doing and their resulting current state due to the nature of theoptions available to them. Consequently, thecapability is not merely concerned with achievements; rather, freedom of choice, in and ofcont.

Focus on these competences, if taken in the context
of learning and with a clarified philosophy of change
behind it, might help to avoid compartmentalization
resulting from a focus on narrowly defined topics andbring forward synergies in the areas of SD. That is applicable not only in relation to individual educational
processes but also in relation to the design of the educational systems or the frameworks guiding them. For
example, Wiek, Withycombe & Redman (2011) classify
the core competences into five categories that are particularly relevant for the RCE community as they areinterlinked with the learning, research and problemsolving framework. System competence helps tounderstand complexity of a problem at hand and its
genesis. Strategic competence enables linking theory
and practice towards desired change with desirability of direction and principles of actions informed bynormative competence, which points at the concepts
and norms of sustainability. Anticipatory competence
relates to the long-term future-oriented thinking andintergenerational justice and interpersonal competence facilitates successful collaboration, partnershipand leadership across sectors and disciplines. In combination, and taken in the context of regional learning
among partners, they can mobilize appropriate actions
in a specific context. In other words, the attentionof the RCE community on ESD competences helps
systematic, long-term partnership engagement withcomplex regional risks.
RCEs have used their knowledge of competences andcapabilities thinking in contributing not only actions

Part II

itself, is of direct importance to a person’squality of life. The idea of developing andemerging freedoms, from within, is central tocapabilities.
Key projects of our RCE KwaZulu Natal are
seeking to orient their work around the building of freedoms. The principle of RCE work
being “close and local” also enables the development of freedoms where local engagements with issues and risks become a key.
The work thus seeks to address and buildfrom local practice and experience rather
than hypothetical theory.
Our Sustain-Ed project, for example, which
offers accredited training, aims towards “training that achieves a sense of pride and purpose” while much of the training emphasizes
practices or practical activities and solutions
within the range of risks our region of South
Africa is facing. Risks include water and sanitation, abject poverty, informal settlements,
to mention a few.
Eco-Schools provide warm bodies or enthusiastic supporters across South Africa who seek
to support meaningful learning at schools
and in neighbouring communities. An assessment framework that emphasizes how
the school has changed to become more environmentally effective, rather than focusing
on absolute criteria, strengthens the socialchange dimensions of transformation within“school in community” contexts.
Share-Net is another partner of our RCE.
Through Share-Net a range of inexpensive
resource materials are developed and disseminated across southern Africa. In just the last
six months, more than 20,000 resources werepurchased from Share-Net. Such materials
are available copyright-free and can readily
be adapted and re-developed to suit individual and local contexts.
in their respective regions but also in shaping discussions on the relevant policy frameworks. For example,
the recent consultations on re-orientation of technicaland vocational education and training (TVET) held by
the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) received significant input from the RCE
representatives who, among other issues, brought tothe fore the importance of sustainability competences.
It appears that the RCEs are actively pursuing competences-led learning, especially in areas where they
engage in learning processes with educators (Box 2.5).
That is significant when applied to education and learning, as a competences-informed approach facilitates
re-orientation of focus from a teacher to a studentcentred approach, and a shift of policies towards outcome orientation (Tiana, 2004). RCEs also, as mentioned earlier, look for the approaches that “transcendcompetences and emergent system thinking frameworks for co-engaged human endeavour to reflexively
produce freedoms that enhance sustainability and reduce risk” (O’Donoghue, Chapter 5).

Learning through Assessment
As discussed in the earlier section “Fostering Shared
Goals and Value System”, there could be differing
views on setting shared frames of reference on regional
development challenges, indicators of progress of the
network and perspectives on outcomes. In spite of adiversity of perspectives, and largely because of it, theassessment of the RCEs is designed as a learning andcapacity development process in itself, with three overarching goals (UNU-IAS, 2013):
1. To collectively learn about the work of RCEs andthereby improve its quality;
2. To improve the quality of RCE contributions totransformative learning and sustainability change;and3. To facilitate collective work of RCEs as a networked
community engaged in diverse social learning andchange initiatives.
The first goal reflects the potential for RCE assessment
as a capacity for its members to generate monitoringand evaluation assessments that are helpful for reporting, and to improve their RCE as a social learning for

59

60

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		Part IIchange initiative. Such learning could be focused not
only on the sustainability goals that the RCE members collectively pursue in context or region, but also
on the ways the RCE members and stakeholders workand learn together (i.e. through establishing governance and coordination).
The second goal relates to the capability of generating
appreciative contextual evidence on change-oriented
activities of the RCEs as regional stakeholders working in the context of social learning to foster change that reduces risk. Such work has the potential tostimulate not only change-orientated work in local
RCE contexts but also coordinated work across theRCE community and with its global stakeholders.
The third goal relates to the capacities for coordinateddialogue and collective action across RCEs on issuesof monitoring and evaluation.
Strategies of evaluation can take several forms withseveral of them, such as constitutive evaluation,
appreciative enquiry and strategic evaluation, being
articulated by the working groups of the RCEs in2013 and used by a pioneering group of RCEs in AsiaPacific. More details on the evaluation development
history and approaches are presented in Chapter 7.
The next step in evaluation has been developed by agroup of southern African RCEs where an evaluation
toolkit, based on earlier tested approaches, has beenaddressing the quality of evaluative data and the depthof collaborative learning in the RCEs. The combined
and integrated evaluative approaches include documentation of how an RCE had developed up to thispoint (constitutive evaluation), inquiry into the RCE’s
successes, coordination and collaborative learning(appreciative and developmental evaluation), andvalue creation assessment of the RCE’s overall work.
The process of assessment is not without challenges.
This has been testified to by the RCEs that have undertaken self-assessment as it requires not only additional time and resources but also the capacity to undertake evaluation in a manner that contributes to the development of an RCE while strengthening its impact
in the region. The RCEs, however, realize that evaluation itself can and does serve as a process of collective
learning as well as documentation of such learning
within the individual RCEs and, as the experience of
RCEs in southern Africa shows, across the RCE com-

Box 2.5
Competences and Capabilities
for Learners and Educators
RCE Delhi
RCE Delhi’s work is centred on building
competences and capabilities of learners and educators. Some of the initiatives,
such as “Leadership Training Programme
for Educators on School Management” and“Leadership Training Modules for Students”
directly incorporate this concept. For example:
Competences play a vital role in the successful implementation of ESD and related
projects and programs. In this respect RCE
Delhi has been able to positively incorporate
varied competences and capabilities of partner organizations. These are also some of thefactors that have helped the RCE to leverageexpertise and collaborate towards the development agenda.
The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)
implemented a project, “Rhythms from River
Banks”, in partnership with Delhi Government
Environment Department, TERI University
and Miranda House College, all a part of RCE
Delhi. This project focused on environmental and sociocultural aspects with activities
for youth related to knowledge, awarenessand action. It integrated diverse competences such as knowledge, field researchetc. and implemented it in colleges in Delhi.
“Miles on Yamuna”, a research initiative by
Miranda House, has contributed to this program by tapping the research competencesof students. An effective approach towards
life-long learning has been possible withthe development of various tools and methods by partners within RCE Delhi, namely
TERI, National Science Centre, WWF Delhi
and the National Bal Bhavan.
Use of communication strategies has beena strength of the group of partners, mainly
schools, colleges and universities. The annual
YUVA meet is an example wherein communicont.

61

62

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development		cation within and outside has been effectively
used to reach out to a very large number ofyouth across the world.
All this has been possible due to the foresight,
motivation and regular interaction within RCE
Delhi. (R. Saikia and R. Buti)
RCE Tongyeong
We feel the concept of competences and capabilities for sustainable life is important inmaking actual changes in everyday choices.
Through our regular workshops and training courses for teachers and educators at
the school education committee and citizen
education committee, we try to emphasize
and experiment with this concept in mind.
Participants admit the importance of enhancing competences for a sustainable lifestyle,when they understand that it is the essenceof what we are here to do. Such efforts led
to projects such as “Clean Plate Movement”
and “Bridge to the World”, which requirelearners to build their competences and capabilities for a sustainable way of thinking,which of course need changes in the way
educators guide learners. People often findit quite challenging to put this thinking into
practice, but we feel it is something we train
ourselves as trainers to learn, together withthe learners. (W. Byun)

munity. These two insights prompt a strategy where
facilitative assistance and support will be offered to
the RCEs planning to undergo a process of evaluation.
Such support has already started through engaging
experts within the RCE community to develop theevaluation concept and strategies, and through acollective effort between coordinators of the RCEs
pioneering evaluative approaches and UNU-IAS in
preparing and facilitating first rounds of evaluations.

Mediating Local and Global
One of the core capacities required within the RCEcommunity is the mediation of global and local contexts. In an increasingly integrated world, this is aninevitable skill for translation of policy perspectives tolocal actions, and their appropriate collective implementation. From the time of the Earth Summit, fordiverse reasons the stress on building multistakeholder processes for sustainability has increased. Whereas linking global with local is a relatively easy proposition, translating and influencing policy-setting
contexts based on local learning is much more challenging. Mediating the local and global is not onlyin terms of learning and policy linkages but also forresource mobilization required for activities beyond
customary actions – for actions larger in thematicor geographic scale, and mobilization and exchangeof technical and human capacity. A major outcomein this area has been in terms of building thematiccompetences in areas such as higher education, sustainable consumption and production, traditional
knowledge, biodiversity, health and climate change(see Chapters 3, 4 and 6 for further elaboration).

The global/local engagement of the RCEs has been made possible, among otherfactors, because of their association with UNU, which mediated the ways of engagement between local and global partners. As a result, individual RCEs have, atvarious times, contributed to discussions on biodiversity and traditional knowledge in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD 10th Conferenceof Parties (COP10) in 2010, CBD COP11 in 2012; see Chapter 6 for more insights),
framing of the ideas for transformation of TVET (UNECE consultations, March2014), exploration of the role of youth in addressing climate change (consultationsof the UN Interagency Committee for the DESD, 2013), and facilitation of ideas
for transformation of the higher education area (Fadeeva et al., 2014). Notably, theRCEs have contributed to the key events related to the formulation of the global
sustainable development agenda including a number of meetings of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) in New York as well as the Rio+20
meeting, in an attempt to strengthen understanding and acceptance of ESD as a
key strategy for development (Chapter 6).

Part II

Reflections

Locality has been listed as one of the essential characteristics of ESD(UNESCO, 2005). RCE is the local platform of ESD for community-basedawareness of sustainability to build civil capacity to reach the level of sustainable society. How to transform global issues and priorities of sustainability
into local needs and priorities? It should be purely guided by the hands of local
expertise to make the local community sustainable. Without local civil engagement of people, the global agenda of sustainability will never be implemented into the level of actual living.
Korean RCEs value the specific cultural, historic and natural background of
their communities – people are proud of being born there. Thus, self-esteem
and community-love became the backbone of Korean RCEs. RCEs should
be promoted to implement the co-existing value of the human as well as ecological worlds. Individuals of each community find a way to reach peace
along with fellow members of society and nature. Thus, ESD is what Everybody Should Do (ESD).
Eun-Kyung Park
Vice Chairperson
Korean National Commission for UNESCO

An important cross-cutting, yet specific, area relating to the global/local mediationis the work on specific projects, publications, policy materials, capacity-building
tools etc. Such work is assisted by the development of the thematic clusters thathave emerged as one of the ways of inter-RCE collaboration from 2007 (see also
Chapter 1 for insights into this development). While project activities in some of
the areas are initiated and conducted by the RCEs themselves, the Global RCE
Service Centre hosted by UNU-IAS has begun providing conceptual and strategic
advice on the projects with broader cross-cutting topics that are not customary
for the RCE communities to address or that have very different interpretations invarious regions.
Regional and thematic networking have been other areas of special capacities within the RCE network. Such empowerment has happened mainly through the institutional and thematic capacities in terms of technical skills as well as links withother intra-RCE and inter-RCE networks, and with other SD and ESD networks.

63

64

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		Part II

Some examples of such networking are the development of capacities of RCEs in
Africa, Asia and Europe for ESD re-orientation of TVET, facilitated by the European Regional Advisor Jos Hermans; Sejahtera project led by RCE Tongyeong with
the Asia-Pacific RCEs; thematic work on issues of water led by RCE Rhine-Meuse
with partners in Grand Rapids, Delhi and Greater Nairobi; facilitation and handholding of North American RCEs by RCE Saskatchewan; traditional knowledge
activities among South American RCEs led by RCE Lima-Callao; and national
networking of RCEs in Kenya led by the National Environmental Management
Authority of the Government of Kenya. Several other thematic clusters and technical leadership, too, are evolving within the network.

The educational sector mediation provides guidance and leadership across educa- Intra and Intertional fields as well as across the informal and formal educational column, from Educational Sector
preschool through university. Where HEIs educate future teachers and develop Mediation
capacities of the in-service educators, long-term engagements with the school system and organizations of non-formal learning make such practices more effective.
In this regard, and as education is also about quality education and knowledge,
attitudes, values, lifestyle practices and skills, the presence of partners promoting
partnerships among formal education institutions and the informal and nonformal sectors is a core capacity that is required of RCEs.
Specifically, at least 70 per cent of the RCEs have an
HEI as a core partner in the network. The HEIs could
support the RCEs as informed mediators of the network, as well as providing an evidence base for the
propositions and outcomes of the RCE work (Chapter 1). Since the work in RCEs is interdisciplinary andproblem-based, it is important to build horizontal andvertical links within the formal education sector, including interdisciplinary and multisectoral collaboration. HEIs, with stable human and financial resources, have a social responsibility and a moral obligation(derived from their autonomy and academic freedom)
to address sustainability challenges. At the sametime, the presence of the partners representing various sectors of society enable transformation of HEIs
by providing them with ample opportunities to fulfil
the “third mission” of higher education (service to thesociety). RCEs such as Yogyakarta have demonstrated
well that HEIs with their vast youth resource can use
action-oriented research to develop their own capacity
to engage in transformative ESD through their community internship programs.
To fulfil expectations in relation to sustainable development, HEIs have to face the challenge of transforming themselves (Ref. Rio+20 Treaty on Higher

Box 2.6
Working across Sectors
The Institute of Interethnic Studies, the leaderof RCE Guatemala, carried out a campaignthat influenced the creation of a training program on inter-culturality for professors at the
San Carlos University of Guatemala, approvedby the University Council. RCE Guatemala,with the intention to influence policy and put
the program into immediate action, steered aseminar on ”Mayan Cities: A Teaching Treasure” as a pilot project. Educational visits wereconducted to Mayan cities and museums
to learn about Mayan civilization and its relationship with nature and the cosmos, its
technological assets and its modes of economic, social and political organization. Culturalcontent as history, the collective memory ofpeoples, their heroes, their customs, traditions and all the experiences from their cultural heritage should be necessary parts of theeducational system to reinforce the sense ofindividual and collective identity. 

cont.

65

66

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		The living laboratory on education for sustainability in Greater Western Sydney, Australia,
supported by RCE Greater Western Sydney,namely, the University of Western Sydney(UWS) Hawkesbury Riverfarm, addresses major sustainability challenges that relate directly to public health, developing more active
lifestyles, living and working productively
with diversity and economic vitality. These
activities have influenced organizational policymaking and planning, and the executionof sustainability projects. These include renovation and reformation of the site, green
skills development for students, riverbank
restoration, and biodiversity studies. In addition, buy-ins and support of senior leadersof school and vocational education in NSW,
have enabled the site to become a demonstration park for renewable energy, among
others.

Education ). However, convincing these institutions’policymakers is not necessarily an easy task. Much
persuasion and convincing may be needed before thepolicy for transformation can be adopted and takeeffect in the organization. In this respect, a campaign
strategy of influencing policy could be made. Clear
examples of how an RCE could influence institutional policymaking at the level of an organization areavailable from RCEs Guatemala and Greater Western
Sydney, Australia (see Box 2.6).

With transformation of higher education becoming
an increasingly articulated call of today, RCEs demonstrate a capacity to offer a powerful platform forinnovation, supporting design of the forward-looking
sustainability strategies of HEIs and redefining qualities of their core activities. The flagship project of
RCE Severn (hosted at the University of Gloucestershire) brought together partners who worked as ateam in designing and implementing strategic approaches to bring ESD into central curriculum development processes. Engaging universities, relevant
key government departments, Quality Assurance Agency, experts representing
key stakeholders, university educators and professional staff, the project demonstrated new ways of mainstreaming ESD nationally while serving as an inspirational example for the international community.
The presence of HEIs in an RCE’s local networks often makes it easier for innovative ideas to travel to other regions through higher education communities and networks, nationally and internationally. RCE Dhaka’s experiment to enable students
from economically poor and vulnerable communities to engage in higher education has become, through the actions of International University of Business
Agriculture and Technology (IUBAT), the first non-government university of
Bangladesh and a key member of the RCE, known to other universities in Bangladesh. Such practice pioneers a higher education strategy of giving, in each locality,“marketable knowledge and skills with sustainability practices”.
The communication gap between scientists and educators, including those outside the higher educationsystem, has been identified as a major gap in ESD implementation. This can be overcome by the creation of more spaces for dialogue,
such as the Promotion of Sustainability in Postgraduate Education and Research
Network (ProSPER.Net; see Box 2.7) projects. Engagement within such spaces,or the clustering approach, is where institutions make alliances and address ESD
issues for contributing to sustainability transformation of their respective organizations.

Part II

Innovation and Developmentfrom Within
In the face of a multitude of challenges and accelerated changes in today’s world, diversity of communities with their values, worldviews, reasoning methods, knowledge practices and technologies should, inprinciple, be an asset to create a more resilient andjust world. Yet, many of these communities miss out
on dignified development as often, especially for communities in a subsistence state, their knowledge is
not connected to productive livelihood practices. To
address the problem, such communities have to overcome a lack of access to resources, legitimacy of local
knowledges and their mismatch with mainstream
practices, challenges of knowledge transfer in informal settings, and legitimacy of informally acquired
skills.

Box 2.7
ProSPER.Net
The aim of ProSPER.Net, which works under
the auspices of UNU-IAS, is to transform higher education institutions. It is an alliance ofleading universities in the Asia-Pacific region
that are committed to integrating sustainable
development into postgraduate courses andcurricula. Its thrusts are integration of sustainability in curricula, capacity development,
and influence on the policies of HEIs, throughthe activities of the network and its members
and in cooperation with similar ESD networks. A number of ProSPER.Net member
institutions are either assuming leading roles
or participating in the UNU multistakeholder
RCE initiative. Among the projects of
ProSPER.Net is the “Education Programme
for SD of Regional Society with a Focus on
Biodiversity” led by Yokohama National University (lead partner of RCE Yokohama), whichaims at ensuring practicability of training andproblem-solving skills by producing educational material to teach science. Anotherproject is ProSPER.Net’s Young Researchers’
School (YRS) where scientists and educatorscome together for an intensive discussion onsustainability in their research agenda.

Regional change towards sustainability as learningand experimentation, that underlie the strategies ofmany RCEs, help regional partners to contribute toflourishing local innovations. They give control for development direction and processes to the regional stakeholders while supporting local innovations throughharnessing local knowledge and resources, developing
required skills, and creating a collaborative multistakeholder environment. The example of RCE Makana andRural Eastern Cape shows a variety of change-practice
approaches that leads to cultivation of productive
activities, such as local markets, and small and bicyclebased cleaning and composting businesses, based on the local resources. RCESkåne, in redefining local food systems through changing school meals towards
more organic foods, while drawing on support of universities, municipalities andfamilies through research and education, is a case in point (Chapter 4).

One of the key challenges of the current time is finding ways for people and communities to work and live in a decent and aspirational way, without destruction of
the natural environment or over-exploiting resources. Strategies that support thealignment of livelihood practices with (sustainable) development strategies often
rely on innovations, including re-orientation in educational practices, in the areaof sustainable consumption and production (SCP).
Entrepreneurship and creativity of entrepreneurs have long been seen as a way
for producing valuable alternatives for conventional ways of doing business at theexpense of society and nature. In this light, the power of entrepreneurial education as learning that creates capacities enabling exploration of new sustainability
opportunities through re-orienting existing companies or creating new ones isbroadly acknowledged. Practices of the RCEs have demonstrated how learning
leads to identification of market and non-market opportunities for identification

Innovation and
Entrepreneurship:
Learning forlivelihoods

67

68

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		of more sustainable products and services, creating conditions for developing
production and consumption practices supporting livelihoods including throughcreating synergies between various, and at times competing, sectors.
Entrepreneurship practices of RCE Delhi, for example, have focused on the development of livelihood opportunities for women in resource-poor urban communities. Considerable effort of the RCE partners and the communities they
represent was spent on identification of for-profit market opportunities built ona strategy of initially identifying resources (from waste materials) and potential
markets for products made from these (handicrafts, bags, etc). In addition, skills
needed for their production and distribution were also identified. The success ofthe project is a result of the collective efforts of organizations enabling strategic
analysis of the entrepreneurial opportunities (by higher education institutions),
learning of new skills and capabilities (by NGOs) and creation of appropriate institutional conditions (by governmental departments). Efforts of RCE Vienna inempowering sustainability entrepreneurs is grounded in the collective learning
process leading, among other outcomes, to discoveries of additional entrepreneurial opportunities. The critical element of the project is enabling innovations thatare conceived within the walls of academia to enter markets while influencing
sustainable development of this cross-border region.
Entrepreneurship contribution to sustainable development is not limited to thelivelihood of individuals and communities. Often, and spontaneously, it addresses
questions of climate change, resilience, health, nutrition, etc. Practices of RCEs
Cebu, Lucknow, Makana, and Kakamega-Western Kenya empower developmentof local livelihood practices (and entrepreneurs who often come from vulnerable
communities) to simultaneously address well-being of the communities and environmental sustainability.
TVET is one of the key learning institutions that supports entrepreneurial development as well as life-long learning in general. As it prepares people that deliver products and services to communities, their re-orientation towards moresustainable practices – in terms of redefining competences and capabilities ofgraduates, alignments with policies of national development, and introductionof sustainability through the whole institution approach – becomes a key. So docollective learning and innovation with stakeholders in the society, and the partnerships that could emerge through the RCE communities (see example of RCE
Hamburg, Chapter 4).

Reflections

The question this chapter seeks to answer relates to the role of multistakeholder,cross-sectoral regional initiatives such as RCEs in building capacity of regions forpursuing more sustainable development, including development of SCP and sustainable livelihoods, locally and globally. Why are such consortia important today,
and what do partners with attention to sustainability and learning do in conditionsof rapidly accelerating changes underlying financial, economic and ecosystemcrises?
We suggest that that at the centre of development based on principles of equity,well-being, ecosystem sustainability, resource efficiency, economic sufficiency

Part II69

70

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development

		and societal resilience lie local actions and learning. At the same time, actions
and learning are connected to other regional practices and to policy development.
Such initiatives become nodes of innovation and, most critically, supporters of new
regimes promoting more sustainable consumption and production and livelihood
systems.
Initiatives that support development from within are balancing the dominantdevelopment trends where production and consumption systems and quality oflife are impacted by the global markets and relations across global supply chains.
Lifestyles are defined by tendencies to over-consume and by lifestyle ideals promoted by the mass media. As demonstrated by the RCEs in Asia-Pacific, Africa,
Europe, Australia, and North and South America (Chapters 3 and 4), the RCE
global community is gradually becoming a significant player in developing andpromoting expertise for a transition towards SCP and sustainable livelihood. At
the level of communities, the initiatives provide a business case for the key themesof SCP: working with innovative practices for a green economy (e.g. RCE Makana,
RCE Delhi); development of high quality TVET education (e.g. RCE Greater Western Sydney, RCE Hamburg); identifying livelihood improvement opportunities(e.g. RCEs London, KwaZulu Natal, Cairo, Rhine-Meuse, Greater Phnom Penh,
Lucknow, Graz-Styria); creating locally relevant consumer education processes(e.g. RCE Kitakyushu); and pursuing opportunities for sustainable entrepreneurship (e.g. RCE Delhi, RCE Vienna).
Such emerging success is underscored by the key characteristics of the RCEs –their multistakeholder composition and attempts to sustain relations with the regional stakeholders, including with the HEIs; their attention to common values, development of capabilities in the local contexts; their experience with collaborative
projects within and across regions, and their focus on innovation and transformative learning. Evidence shows that RCEs, individually and collectively, can offer
opportunities for business and non-business organizations to develop modes of
production that sustain natural and social capital over long periods of time (as demonstrated by the work of Bumi Farm working with other partners of RCE Kakamega-Western Kenya). By engaging the knowledge and innovative potential of theregions, including non-business partners, and by minimizing and distributing
risks, RCEs create new, strategically-oriented opportunities not only in competitive
modern markets but also through productive activities outside markets.
RCE practices are expected to hold potential for growing regional innovation
as they are facilitated by the ways RCEs develop, document and communicate
knowledge and experiences using media (both traditional and social media) as
well as academic and non-academic publications. Inter-RCE projects that address
local SCP challenges and engage multiple partners also enable the development
and sharing of tacit knowledge. Knowledge required for new SCP projects might
be supported by new scholarly practices that rely on multisectoral consortia facilitated by RCEs – consortia where research questions, learning and innovations areundertaken by partners beyond academia.

Part IIAt the same time, connections developed among RCEs within and across different
continents provide a critical global dimension necessary for addressing the challenges of SCP and sustainable livelihood in the future, by providing deeper understanding of ongoing practices, systematic conceptualization of possible paths
towards sustainable practices, fostering local and global policies conducive fordeveloping sustainable societies, and forging deeper synergies among processes
and programs that are focused on the issue. To further the discussion, the following chapters, 3 and 4, attempt to illustrate connections among SCP, livelihood,biodiversity practices of the RCEs, and broader regional and global policy processes, research and actions.
With all its potential, the major challenge for the whole RCE community is tofurther build and deliver capacity important for sustainability and learning locally
and, through collaborative actions with RCEs in other regions as well as with othercritical partners, to build the global knowledge base for combating the consequences of current dominant ways of consuming and producing and providing care to
all members of the society.

References
Fadeeva Z., Galkute, L., Mader, C. & Scott, G. (inpress). Sustainable development and quality assurancein higher education: Transformation of learning and thesociety. Palgrave Macmillan.
Haverkort, B., Van’t Hooft, K. & Hiemstra, W. (Eds.)(2003). Ancient roots new shoots. Leusden: ETC/Compas and Zed Books.
The Lancet Commission. (2010). The Millennium
Development Goals: A cross-sectoral analysis andprinciples for goal setting after 2015. LIDC.
Retrieved June 15, 2014 from http://download.
thelancet.com/flatcontentassets/pdfs/
S0140673610611968.pdf
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York:
Knopf.

Tiana, A. (2004). Developing key competencies in
education systems: Some lessons from international
studies and national experiences. In Developing key
competencies in education, (pp. 35-80). UNESCO:
International Bureau of Education.
Weik, A., Withycombe, L. & Redman, C. (2011). Key
competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability Science. Retrieved July 3, 2014 from http://
www.e3washington.org/upload/profile/resources/
file-268.pdf
WECD (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

71

72

Chapter 2 Capacities and Learning for Multistakeholder Partnerships
and Sustainable Development		

Reflections

The Grand Rapids RCE, located in Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, is a bit of ananomaly within the RCE family. The RCE designation was given in 2007, not to asingle entity such as a university, but to the City of Grand Rapids and the Community Sustainability Partnership (CSP), a collaborative of 240 organizations andenterprises across the public, private, and academic sectors. The three major goals of
RCE Grand Rapids are:Goal #1: Encourage ESD and help CSP members implement sustainability. Results:
Five local colleges offer degree programs in sustainability; many of the CSP members
have developed sustainability plans and reports; CSP organizations have been established in three geographical regions of Michigan and several outside Michigan.
Goal #2: Introduce youth to the principals of sustainability. Results: We have hosted
two Youth Virtual Conferences on water resource issues and food security; RCEs fromthree continents (six countries) have participated.
Goal #3: Develop grassroots sustainable neighbourhood initiatives in low-income
communities. Results: Seeds of Promise (www.seedsofpromise.net) empowers local
residents to improve decisionmaking in leadership, employment, health, education,and housing opportunities.
Further development of each goal area is being planned for the future.
By Mayor George K. Heartwell, City of Grand Rapids, USA

Part II73

74

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		Part II

Chapter 3

Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centresof Expertise on Education for
Sustainable Development1
Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana and Zinaida Fadeeva

RCEs were developed as sites for participatory learning and action within the
DESD, opening up more collaborative and inclusive learning spaces towards
more just and sustainable ways of life, now and in the future. This chapter reviews some of the contours of these emergent education processes of collaborative learning-to-change as they relate to traditional knowledge (TK) and biodiversity in many RCE contexts today. It takes particular note of how RCE processes
that include traditional knowledge practices are emerging to address biodiversity loss within a social-ecological perspective across heritage, local issues and thecurrent state of environmental knowledge. It also discusses how multistakeholder, cross-sectoral initiatives such as RCEs open new opportunities forvarious knowledges, especially traditional knowledge, to interact on a new andequal footing, for the benefit of (sustainable) development. The RCE cases
examined here are characterized by local expertise being brought together in
open-ended, practical and co-engaged approaches to social and transformative
learning. The RCE approaches reposition the available expertise in collective
learning-to-change endeavours where a grasp of what is changing and producing risk is practically deliberated across what is known and what might bedone about the problems that are confronting a society.

1 This chapter was developed from the earlier published editorial in Payyappallimana, U. and Fadeeva, Z., (Eds.) (2013). Innovation in
Local and Global Learning Systems for Sustainability: Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity. Learning Contributions of the Regional Centresof Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development, UNU-IAS.

75

76

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		The local heritage of traditional knowledge practices and patterns of valuing in
relation to biodiversity have not always been read within an open-ended biocultural diversity perspective such as this. The development and learning within
the RCEs that recognizes the often plural and yet integrated nature of the inhabitants of modern social-ecological systems is often possible as the RCEs aregoverned by the ESD principles that recognize a need for multiple perspectives
in learning while acknowledging the complexity of working across sectoral anddisciplinary boundaries – challenges that are addressed in this chapter.

Bio-cultural
Diversity andSustainable
Development

In its broad sense the term bio-cultural diversity denotes an inseparable link between
the diversity of life forms, their ecosystems and environments on the one hand
and the array of human-made expressions in relation to these. In totality, thisview has come to encompass genes, species, ecosystems, landscapes and seascapes to worldviews, belief systems, knowledge, morals, values, norms, languages,
rules, artistic expressions, artifacts and institutions of a region that have generally
been passed on through an intergenerational transmission process and are sharedby a group (Haverkort, 2006; Ibisch, Vega & Herrmann, 2010).

A social-ecological approach here reiterates the inherent, dynamic relationshipbetween nature and humankind and hence a biological and cultural diversity perspective for development towards a sustainable future. From a utilitarian point ofview, bio-cultural diversity impacts human well-being through ecosystem services
as well as cultural resources in sectors such as agriculture, health, food security, environmental protection, purification of air and water,
climate regulation, natural resource management,
Box 3.1
land use, livelihoods, disaster management, arts andDevelopment Context:
culture, among many others. Consider, for example, theChanges in perspectives
case of traditional knowledge in the realm of medicine:the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that
Policy, as a policed course of action in the
traditional medical practices, in some regions, accountgoverning of civil society for the common
for up to 70-80 per cent of the world population’s
good, has seldom taken account of TK in enhealth requirements, especially in developing counvironmental management practices for biotries (WHO, 2003). The inherent link of communitydiversity conservation. Traditional ecological
specific knowledge with local ecosystems is obvious inpractices were most often seen as destructithe usage of plants, and animal and mineral/metal deve, notably the use of fire to manage range
rivatives that are primarily locally available and easily
lands or shifting agriculture where slash andaccessible in traditional health cultures. Upholding
burn methods were used. Traditional uses
and revitalizing such knowledge is seen as an imof plants by indigenous communities were
portant mechanism for affirming identity and social
noted and documented for commercial excohesion and has a vital role in local livelihoods andploitation, most often without reference tosocioeconomic and cultural systems. In mega-diverse
the communities that were custodians of thatcountries that are experiencing rapid economic andknowledge.
social transition, bio-cultural diversity holds major
untapped potential for poverty alleviation and local
Prior to recent global conventions, policing
development in multiple sectors (Ibisch, Vega & Herregulations often encouraged the exploitativemann, 2010).
mining of cultural capital with the appropriation of local natural resources and naturalreDespite the strong reliance of human existence oncont.
biodiversity, its rapid decline due to human inter-

Part IIventions is alarming. The Millennium Assessment
Report indicates that developed and fast-developing
regions with higher gross domestic product (GDP)have critical loss of biodiversity (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Corresponding to the lossof diversity in traditional languages the world over,traditional knowledge practices are also eroding at a
rapid pace. The loss of biota and associated traditional
knowledge practices can have a significant negative
impact on the livelihoods, production systems (bioresource-based markets) and the health of local communities (TEEB, 2010; Suneetha & Balakrishna, 2010).
The erosive trajectories here are compounded by theconcern that there are no comprehensive approaches
to valuing these ecosystem services as policymakers
often have less conviction, compared to other sectors,
regarding the need for national and subnational level efforts for conservation and development in the
sector. While such dominant practices are rooted in
the history of governance of biodiversity (Box 3.1), assuring conservation and sustainable use of biologicalresources is increasingly becoming a high priority
area in the sustainable development agenda. Whereas
regulated, sensitive use is important for sustenanceof biological diversity, augmented, active use as social
traditions is vital for revitalizing, as well as protecting, traditional knowledge practices. Increasing socialand economic disparity and inequitable access to resources and benefits is an area that has been actively
discussed in international as well as national policy
processes. Recognizing the potential of local livelihoods through appropriate access and benefit sharing (ABS) mechanisms is an area that is still in a
nascent stage. These challenges are often dealt withindividually and not in an integrated manner at thelevel of implementation. For instance, in the case of
improving nutritional or health security, conservation
programs of local cultivars or varieties may not necessarily be based on the contextual nutritional needs, or
the knowledge or technical resources available withina region. The ecosystem services framework, to agreat extent, addresses the issue by broadening theperspective of biological and cultural diversity. To beeffective, local development approaches need integrated frameworks and strategies related to various resources such as biological, knowledge, human, social,economic, produced, and cultural.

source areas. The early approach was thus toprotect natural resource areas, taking little
account of local knowledge and practices inrelation to their natural history. Indigenous
peoples were often seen as noble but primitive communities that needed to be rescued
from their ignorance and destructive practices. These colonial and, later, some of the
post-colonial policies consequently reflected
a double separation – people from natureand institutions of governance from people.
These separations opened up specialist outsider and institutional imperatives to educate
by communicating the conservation message
so as to change this perception. The last 50
years have produced a slow shift in policy
across the globe and the beginnings of social-ecological perspectives being brought
into community-engaged policy development are emerging within new multilateralperspectives on cultural diversity and traditional knowledge.
The attendant concern for traditional knowledge practice and the democratic inclusionof indigenous peoples in co-engaged landuse management decisions is being foundto have a natural affinity with an integrative
perspective that has long been central to
TK practices. Here cultural knowledge andpractices were the balancing facets between
natural or ecological resources and humanintervention and any development (Berkes &Folke, 1994; Cochrane, 2006). According to
Breidlid (2009) the modern hegemonic discourse of economic development has fallen
short of exploring the potential of diverse
knowledge systems, considering these as an
impediment to development. A key challenge
for stakeholders who are striving to promote
the concept of SD is to find appropriate tools
to convey the spearheading roles that cultural knowledge, norms and values play inachieving SD.

77

78

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		Contemporary
Policy Context

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) calls for the need to respect, preserve and maintain traditional cultures; encourage customary custodial use of
biological resources in line with principles of sustainable use and conservation;and ensure equitable sharing of benefits among holders while accessing biological resources and related knowledge in line with national legislation. By drawing attention to preserving local innovations and practices of “indigenous andlocal communities following traditional lifestyles” it alerts the need for promoting awareness of the importance of biodiversity through various educational interventions, designing suitable educational curricula, and strengthening multilateral cooperation for education for conservation and sustainable use. Recent
developments like the Aichi targets2 have completely
recognized the importance of education awarenessBox 3.2(particularly through Strategic Goal E, Box 3.2), which
Aichi Biodiversity Strategic Goals
highlights the import of strengthening capacities andlearning interventions of various stakeholders.
Strategic Goal A: Address the underlying
causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming
The World Heritage Convention of UNESCO is an imbiodiversity across government and society.
portant instrument for the protection of cultural andnatural heritage. The Convention on Cultural Diversity,
Strategic Goal B: Reduce the direct pressures
yet another multilateral policy instrument of UNESCO,on biodiversity and promote sustainable use.
recognizes the significance of cultural knowledge “asa source of intangible and material wealth” especially
Strategic Goal C: Improve the status of bioin indigenous communities. By pointing to their condiversity by safeguarding ecosystem, species
structive role in SD, it emphasizes thatand genetic diversity.
Strategic Goal D: Enhance the benefits to allfrom biodiversity and ecosystem services.
Strategic Goal E: Enhance implementation
through participatory planning, knowledge
management and capacity building.

… cultural diversity widens the range of options open
to everyone; it is one of the roots of development, understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also
as a means to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual,
emotional, moral and spiritual existence (UNESCO,
2001, p.13).

Avowing the need for appropriate policies to strengthen the developmental role of traditional communities, UNESCO calls for cultural pluralism and freecirculation of ideas. The importance of culture anddevelopment is fittingly underlined in the Convention by calling for national andinternational action that recognizes the link in all countries, specifically in developing regions that still have rich repositories of this diversity. It says that there
is a need to create a favourable atmosphere for production and propagation ofvaried cultural goods and services that have the strength to influence local as well
as global levels (UNESCO, 2005). By emphasizing the central role of culture andthe complementary nature of economic and cultural dimensions of development,
the Convention highlights individuals’ and communities’ “fundamental right toparticipate and enjoy”.

Source: http://www.cbd.int/sp/elements/default.shtml#IV

2 The Aichi Biodiversity Targets are 20 ambitious goals that make up part of the CBD’s Strategic
Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020, adopted in Aichi, Nagoya, Japan, in 2010. The targets provide aframework for action by all stakeholders – including cities – to save biodiversity and enhance its
benefits for people.

Part IIAs a core principle, protection, maintenance and promotion of bio-cultural diversity are vital requirements of SD for present and future generations, while equitable
access to varied expressions and a principle of openness and balance towards
other cultures are equally important.
Conversely, there are different views and perspectives on the integration of cultural knowledge into development programs. These range from romantic (e.g. allpractitioners are knowledgeable, logical and everything in tradition is sound) toutilitarian (e.g. aspects have to be selectively studied to strengthen modern needs)
to pluralistic (e.g. should be allowed to co-exist and play a complementary role)views (Haverkort, 2006).
While this complicates the need for many countries to have a clear national visionon how to integrate cultural knowledge in development, at the level of individuals
and civil society groups several efforts are in progress in areas like health andnutrition, agriculture, rural livelihoods and education, to name a few. Among programs of multilateral organizations responding to this policy context, the RCE network is unique as a local-global collective learning space for ESD. Being sensitive
to the need for diversity in development options, the community of RCEs has initiated a variety of projects of co-engaged learning in integrating TK in addressing
sustainability challenges.

The UNU-IAS ESD Programme aims, among other objectives, to foster and mainstream intercultural approaches within a social learning process through multisectoral, collaborative and interdisciplinary methods. Bio-cultural diversity has
been central to the DESD since the Earth Summit, yet it necessitates increased
attention today in the wake of mounting challenges in the nexus of conservationand development. Learning institutions have a critical role in examining strengths
and weaknesses of pedagogical approaches to initiate culturally and ecologicallysensitive, transdisciplinary, transformative practices at all levels; approaches thatwill eventually lead to transformation of developmental models. Some of the considerations for such change are presented in the following text.
The complex character of the relations between human and natural encompassedby the social-ecological approach need to be addressed within the knowledge andlearning system that appreciates dynamic complexity and inseparability of such
relations. Furthermore, in order to produce change, the learning practices should
go beyond change of values and attitude.
Changing practices is a complex process of behavioural shifts that are to be facilitated, in addition to cultivating new biodiversity-attuned values, by the change ofpractices and culture of the society. Ultimately, the educational systems that seek
transformation might need to engage multiple stakeholders that, through joint
learning, simultaneously facilitate favourable conditions for the attitude-behaviour
shift in individuals, as well as gradual institutional shifts in the communities. With
accelerated speed of changes dramatically impacting the state of the ecosystems aswell as global climate, fiscal, market, development, cultural and social conditions,
one must look for learning that links understanding of the society – biodiversity
relations with the ability to collectively and continuously develop and test new mo-

Learning Together
in Development
Context andChallenges

79

80

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development		dels of production and consumption more fitting for maintaining ecosystems andimproving lifestyles. Impact of climate change, pollution, and overuse of ecosystems that feed into livelihood practices of small and large communities are the mostevident points of current and future innovations for sustainable ecosystems use.
In a way, the point is demonstrated by the attempts of farmers in the coastal areasof Bangladesh – formerly biodiversity rich but currently dramatically degradedfrom population and production pressures – to develop more environmentallybenign and biodiversity-friendly practices of organic agriculture; practices that are
called upon by the impossibility to continue unlimited resource exploitation.
In various world regions, a major untapped potential exists for poverty alleviationand local development as a major percentage of global community continues to havelivelihoods in the nexus of biological and cultural diversity. Enhancing capacities
of local communities for capitalizing on this strength is another area that needs
attention in ESD programs.
The profound impact of biodiversity and TK on the various aspects of humanexistence – from culture and health to opportunities to sustain community livelihoods – calls for education that portrays the topic of biodiversity from multiple
standpoints. Serving as entry points into the subject, angles that discuss gender,
engaging the disenfranchised, and ecosystem services, to name a few, highlightthe foundational value of biodiversity for many aspects of life but also the ways ofdealing with it from different perspectives.
For example, the gender perspective highlights the fact that while both men andwomen depend on ecosystems (and have to be kept in mind in development
efforts), their practices in using ecosystem services differ. Women in poor communities often provide most of the food but are seldom engaged in the decisionmaking. Their knowledge potential is rarely acknowledged and their skills are
seldom harnessed in the developmental processes. The ecosystems services perspective, on the other hand, brings to the fore the need to question whether thecustomary measurement of the biomaterials in tonnes or cubic metres is justifiable, and calls for learning to focus on opportunities for different forms of valuation.
In different corners of the world, there have now been many local initiatives thatlink TK and biodiversity. It is important for learning institutions to critically examine the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches and to explore ways to
upscale them and mediate their interplay with global policies and processes. In
doing so, higher education institutions play a particularly significant role. They
are widely regarded as capable of establishing mechanisms that adequately bringforward TK and integrate it with other knowledges through teaching and research
programs based on appropriate collaborative and interdisciplinary methods. Yet,
to fulfill this role, the institutions of higher education themselves would need toundergo critical transformation leading to appreciation and ability to engage withdifferent forms of knowledge.
There are several socio-political as well as methodological challenges to integrating
TK in sustainability-oriented learning processes. In many regions, research andeducation systems are externally mediated by universal standards paying little

Part II81

82

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development		attention to the local knowledge and practices. In the cases where TK is used, predominantly by academia or private research entities, it is regarded as a subject, ordeliverer of “utilitarian” functions. Long-term, coherent and critical engagement
between various knowledges – engagement motivated by a sound development
vision – remains rare.
Appropriate learning methods with sensitivity to both the development aspirationsof communities as well as epistemic integrity and coherence of local “knowing”
systems are essential. This may be achieved through culturally inclusive pedagogies and their integration into formal and informal learning processes.
Collective learning and inclusive co-engagement as requirements of knowledge
development are critically important to address all aspects of sustainability. Work
with such communities of practice is not an easy matter. Going against often
dominant notions of consensus, which ultimately rely on similar principles andapproaches, means learning to work with different perspectives within a particular
practice, often accompanied by many conflicts and contradictions. Trans-sectoral,transdisciplinary co-engagement means developing new competencies of partnership, in acting and learning. This particular issue of collaborative learning and aperspective that, in the view of the authors, needs to be adopted by the multidisciplinary local consortia, is addressed in the next section.

Regional Collectivesof Learning Action
at the Community
Level

Since its emergence, the RCE network for ESD had an immediate affinity to a morecollaborative approach to learning. Within the community, the idea of regional
centres that bring together local expertise appears to offer a better prospect of inclusivity, and better alignment for understanding and responding to social-ecologicalrisks. Learning is more situated and reflects co-engaged, value-driven approaches
and reflexivity.
Central to an understanding of this shift is the idea that learning is both internallyand externally mediated within processes of co-engaged practice. Elias (1987;
1991) in his works on a long-term social process reading of knowledge production, notes a continuous interplay of involvement and detachment. An emergent
interplay of processes such as these can provide reflective distance, often allowing
one to get around problems to a more congruent grasp of things. Similarly, Archer(2010) notes the role of internal conversation in emergent social processes that
reproduce or change the understandings that inform the valued doings, beings
and ways of knowing that people share.
Here learning is approached as reflexive social processes that are at once place-based,
individual, yet shared cultural-social practices within prevailing cultural capital(Bourdieu, 1990) and within surprisingly robust practice architectures that Kemmis and Mutton (2012) map in their recent study of education for sustainability(EfS). Working with an open-ended perspective on learning is producing a realization that cultures cannot simply be treated as differing worldviews; they are diverse perspectives within practice architectures that refer to a real world of objects
and lend themselves to diverse effects that all have consequences.

Part II

Learning forconservation &revitalization ofnatural and cultural
resources
Monitoring
documentation,
protection andeducation

Worldviews andintegration

Learning
collectives of
bio-cultural
diversity

Ecosystem
services andsustainable use

Coengaged
learning practices
for equity, livelihoods anddevelopment

Figure 1.1 Collaborative links of an RCEOnce again, the RCE offers promise as a site for co-engaged participants to be engaged in learning and action at the community level in a real world that is responding
to and producing risk. Here worlds apart might be re-read as worlds co-engaged
in deliberative change practices towards the production of more just and equitableworlds of practice with less risk and rectifying some of the degradation produced
over a period of widening modernist exploitation and marginalization.
The case studies referred to in this chapter highlight how local and regional consortiums that consist of educational institutions, government agencies and civilsociety organizations can harness local resources and address challenges relating
to sustainable development in the area of bio-cultural diversity. Keeping in mind
the practice as well as policy context, they are classified under five sections: 1) Conservation and revitalization of natural and cultural resources; 2) Ecosystem services and sustainable use; 3) Equity, livelihoods and development; 4) Monitoring,
documentation, protection and education; and 5) Worldviews and integration.

83

84

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		

Regional Capacity-building Workshop
2013 in Kakamega, Kenya

Part II

The world is currently experiencing catastrophic species extinction (e.g. according
to IUCN Red List, between 12 and 52 per cent of species within well-studied higher
taxa are threatened with extinction), which calls for local and global stakeholdersof biodiversity to take urgent measures for their conservation. Benefits, such asprovisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural services of ecosystems, were already mentioned earlier in this chapter. Preservation of biodiversity is reasonably
possible only keeping in mind the ecosystem approach (EA). The EA to management is defined by the CBD as a “strategy for the integrated management of land,
water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an
equitable way” (http://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/). Twelve interlinked principles of
EA emphasize, among other factors critical for management of biodiversity, theimportance of involving all relevant sectors of society and scientific community,
the need to balance local and wider public interests and the rights of the stakeholders, including indigenous peoples, to make their choices.
Looking at biodiversity through the prism of EA management one realizes that thestate of biodiversity and the dynamics of its use are defined by the multiplicity ofpolicies, institutions, actions initiated by individual organizations and civil society.
These make projects of the RCEs ever more important as they not only could pilot
ambitious biodiversity projects but, being long-term functioning networks, mightalso lead to engagement with alliances, strategies and projects leading, in time, toinstitutional arrangements for preservation of bio-cultural diversity in a particularregion.
Although the examples of RCE practices have been classified under specific categories based on the dominant focus of work, these projects have implications inother areas as well. For instance, RCE Penang’s activities are mentioned underthe equity and livelihood category, but the project also focuses on strengthening
healers’ networks and promoting sustainable use of medicinal plants. Similarly,
RCE Cebu, though categorized under ecosystem services and sustainable use, isactively involved in conservation of protected areas. Apart from revitalizing cultural practices of the region, RCE Kodagu also engages in conservation of sacredgroves and promotion of livelihood activities through forest products.
Suffering from the past forestry, mining and smelting activities that led to barren
and contaminated land in the region, more than 30 years ago the City of Greater
Sudbury (the key partner of RCE Greater Sudbury) had initiated the Re-greening
Program. The new biodiversity action plan “Living Landscape”, adopted in 2009,
called for new efforts in developing self-sustained ecosystems. Through its multiple
stakeholders, RCE Greater Sudbury aspired to realize a comprehensive programthat included research, education and community engagement in regional regreening. Transplant of the forest floor from the healthy ecosystems has become
the main technique of re-growth. Other activities include creation of a seed bank by
the local college, tracking and monitoring animals by members of the public, online surveys of amphibians, research by higher education institutions, a variety of
trainings and other capacity development activities. Partnerships based on learning by doing resulted in a holistic model for community development and led tolasting ecological recovery of the area.

Learning forConservation
and Revitalizationof Natural andCultural Resources

85

86

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		

RCE Porto, whose overall goal is development of human capital and preservationof natural capital, has initiated “FUTURE – The 100,000 Trees” project in the
Porto Metropolitan Area. Increase of urban biodiversity and care about ecosystemservices are recognized by the partners as critical for delivering their multiple functions to human habitats. Through social learning and action networks, the RCE
aspires to develop 100 hectares of native woodlands by the year 2015. Complex
work ranging from reforestation areas identification to making landowner agreements, to needs identification and to volunteer training, engages 30 organizations.
Among the partners are the Porto Metropolitan Area Coordination (16 municipalities), non-governmental organizations, the Portuguese Catholic University,
several government offices, private companies, and private forest landowners associations. Collaboration of the partners, which is centred on mutual acknowledgement of responsibilities, an understanding of strengths and opportunities andfocused on developing local capacity for future sustainable development of theforests, have resulted in increased public engagement, generation of new innovative ideas, zero-budget for project development and, ultimately, successful growthof urban forests. The practice of RCE Porto serves as an inspiration for similar
projects in other parts of Portugal.
Priority work for RCE Srinagar and RCE Guwahati is reducing anthropogenicpressure on Himalayan ecosystems. In three cases reported by these RCEs, local
communities took a lead in conserving flagship species of Hoolock Gibbon in
Assam (where agro-forestry practices are synergized with Gibbon conservation),
Blyth’s Tragopan in Nagaland (where youth were engaged in wildlife management and villagers in hospitality services for sanctuary visitors) and developmentof community-owned wildlife sanctuary in Meghalaya. RCE educational interventions range from awareness programs on conservation for schools, communities,
NGOs, youth, teachers and faith organizations to training on management of biodiversity projects.
Apart from these, RCE Greater Dhaka’s coastal area and mangrove ecosystem program and RCE Cebu’s project on protected areas also have a strong conservation
focus.

Ecosystem Services
and Sustainable Use

Ecosystem services on which humanity relies have become the benchmark forthe success of local and global environmental governance. Studies provided by
the RCEs demonstrate how ecosystem services contribute (or could potentiallycontribute) to the well-being of the communities. Interestingly, among the RCEpartners, it is traditional knowledge and the holders of such knowledge that demonstrate the direct link between ecosystem services and food, health or otherhuman needs. By being able to show, even in the absence of efforts for valuationof ecosystem services, the critical role of ecosystem services on local resilience, theTK perspective affirms its own value. The contribution of TK becomes especiallyevident in cases where ongoing economic and financial struggle is combined withsocio-political circumstances that eliminated or severely diminished knowledgeof traditional practices (by either emphasizing other forms of knowledge or eliminating TK as an inferior form of knowing).

Part II

Rekindling TK related to food security, health and livelihood production dependent on ecosystem services becomes not only an opportunity but an urgent need.
Management of ecosystems and their services in the context of multistakeholder
initiatives, such as RCEs, and through co-engaged learning, provides an important opportunity for developing new, more flexible and adaptive approaches. Suchapproaches appear to be most suitable for engagement with complex systems insituations of quick change, uncertainty and limited resources. RCE Cebu works in
Campo Siete (Camp 7), Minglanilla, an area included in the Central Cebu Protected Landscape (CC PL). Spanning an area of 29,062 hectares of adjoining forestlands and watersheds located in the middle of the island province, this area is home
to several endemic species, and ecological resources including springs, rivers,
caves and a watershed. Communities in the nearby area are dependent on thisforest for livelihood including timber and non-timber produce, agricultural land,or activities such as ecotourism. RCE Cebu has done extensive biological resource
and traditional knowledge mapping in this area through interactions with local
healers. They have documented patterns of use of resources for food and medicine. Livelihood initiatives are being supported through cultivation of medicinal
plants and promotion of their sustainable use. Once biodiversity-rich and today
mostly densely populated floodplains and deltas, Bangladesh suffered massive
loss of biodiversity especially during the time of the Green Revolution.
RCE Greater Dhaka is involved in helping restore the biodiversity and manages
the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna floodplains with appropriate crop diversification strategies. It has started a study on crop diversification, traditional multiple
and multi-storey cropping culture, and has also engaged graduate students to study
the local, indigenous rice varieties which are grown in different parts of Bangladesh. The RCE creates awareness through programs for youth and women thathighlight the importance of biodiversity and the genetic resources for food andnutrient security, as well as the need to protect the region from environmental
degradation. The RCE also works on coastal area and mangrove conservation.

A well recognized fact is that mega-diverse regions are faced with a complex dilemma of resource richness on the one hand and poverty on the other. Recognizing
the critical developmental role of bio-cultural diversity studies suggest that organized advancement of bio-enterprise has potential not only in enhancing the livelihoods and well-being of both individuals and communities, but also improving conservation and sustainable resource use, as well as participation of different stakeholders in such measures. Creating appropriate policy frameworks, promoting community-based livelihoods and related capacities, enhancing their access to national
and international markets with ethical and equitable trade, and implementing
ABS frameworks are important goals in the direction (Jaramillo, 2010). Betterawareness on the potential of bio-enterprises for eradication of poverty, assuring
equity and ethical practices is essential, in addition to developing capacities andappropriate technologies for successful bio-enterprises.
Fair and just ABS evolved as an international mechanism for facilitating equitablepartnerships of local communities (mainly with multinational industries or researchers) while sharing bio-resources or traditional knowledge for commercial

Co-engaged
Learning Practices
for Equity,
Livelihoods andDevelopment

87

88

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development		purposes. Even after two decades of policy developments in this direction, its implementation largely remains in the form of pilot models, lacking up-scaling strategies. Whereas several communities have been actively pursuing such an approach,support for such initiatives within the policy processes has lagged behind. Studies
show that ABS as a mechanism within local communities has significant potential
for improving livelihoods (Suneetha & Balakrishna, 2009).
Access and benefit sharing as a model to promote local equity through a contractual agreement between multinational companies and communities, also needs
to support local initiativessuch as bio-resource cooperatives, producer companies,
local protocols and customary practices, which are a critical element in developing
new livelihood practices. Such livelihood models based on the principles of growing from within have shown that a healthy ecosystem and revitalized traditional
knowledge can contribute to better livelihoods as well as well-being (Suneetha,
Hiemstra & Verschuuren, 2010). This is in line with the Nagoya protocol preamble
which notes “… the interrelationship between genetic resources and traditional
knowledge, their inseparable nature for indigenous and local communities, theimportance of the traditional knowledge for the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use.” As many issues that become critical elements of
ABS and are important for new livelihood models are still not adequately considered under the national legislations on ABS, RCEs have an important educationalrole in putting the ABS strategy into practice.
RCE Greater Phnom Penh works with two major stakeholders in the region –elementary schools and farmers. Promoting food, agriculture and environmental
education has been a major thrust area of its work. In order to reduce the threat
to local biodiversity as well as to maintain a healthy population, the partners havebeen involved in sustainable farming practices such as producing and promoting
application of compost, pellet compost, liquid bio-fertilizer and bio-pesticide promoted at elementary schools as well as in the local communities. For elementary
schools, school gardens have been a key activity. Awareness creation and capacitybuilding in organic farming are conducted regularly for local farmers.
Being a domain of aging healers, surrounded by neglect and misunderstanding,
traditional knowledge of household health and nutritional care has been disappearing in many parts of the world in spite of its critical importance to local communities. To address the challenge in its own region, RCE Penang has engaged
representatives of research institutions, industry, the agricultural sector and local
communities in exploratory and action research of TK by documenting, learningand developing regional livelihood practices. Learning that resulted from engagement of multiple partners has been participatory, informal and has led to rich
results. The awareness program developed for the schools and local communities by the researchers and students of the university helped them appreciate theconservation and sustainable use of medicinal plants. Understanding the values
of TK and biodiversity supported the development of livelihood activities arounddevelopment of more than 30 commercial products from torch ginger, which led
not only to financial gains but to an enhanced sense of self esteem and to further
entrepreneurial innovations. The project has also become a catalyst for innovative
experiments such as using abandoned agricultural lands for cultivation throughpartnership with local communities. RCE Penang plays a critical role in liaisingPart II

between industry and agricultural clusters. Ongoing engagement in the inter-RCE
TK and biodiversity group assists RCEs in engagement with research and development partners across other RCEs and beyond.
A key activity of RCE Yogyakarta is the preservation of the Pandanus species in theregion and revitalization of traditional knowledge in the local communities. The
region is rich in natural fibres, resulting in rich traditional knowledge related to weaving. However, this tradition has been slowly eroding. As an economic incentive
for local participation in conservation of natural resources and TK preservation, theRCE has developed an enterprise activity with products made of Pandanus fibre.
The activity is carried out in a unique model of university-local community collaboration called Student Community Service - Community Empowerment Learning (SCS-CEL). The benefits of this social learning program are that it sensitizes
the students to the need to look at issues in the immediate neighbourhood andaddress them through a multistakeholder, participatory approach.

Inadequate monitoring and documentation of bio-cultural resources has been amajor challenge in most countries. In certain regions of the world only a fractionof biological resources have been identified. The case of traditional knowledge isno different, with insufficient systematic documentation of cultural practices invarious bio-geographic regions or sectors. In most local communities, knowledge
is transferred in oral form and there is a rapid erosion of these knowledge
practices. This raises two major concerns – the challenge of preventing loss of biodiversity or erosion of traditional knowledge, and protection from misappropriation of resources and associated TK. There are several other related issues suchas assuring safety and quality of resources or knowledge, valuing resources andrelated knowledge, creating awareness and so on. Development of community
biodiversity registers is considered a sui generis mechanism under the national
biodiversity legislations to protect traditional knowledge. Since the last decade, several initiatives have been undertaken to document biodiversity and sensitize thecommunities on their right to resources and knowledge, with developed registers
or databases being used for education and piracy protection purposes. The Nagoya
Protocol (Article 21) indicates the critical need to raise awareness on the importanceof genetic resources and traditional and related rights of communities. Stressing
the role of education, it calls for the need to build capacities of various stakeholders in equitable and sustainable practices related to biodiversity. Several RCEs
have taken up activities related to resource monitoring, documentation, educationand protection using different strategies.
RCE Cha-am is involved in a biodiversity study titled “Education for Sustainable
Development Center” (ESDC) in the Sirindhorn International Environmental
Park. The focal areas of the study are environmental and natural resources conservation (e.g. restoration of mangrove ecosystem, soil erosion and coastal erosion
protection, deforestation, soil and water management, green energy); ecotourism;
fisheries and agriculture; community uniqueness and indigenous knowledge; anda general understanding of sustainability by following a sufficiency economy philosophy. The methods used are Environmental Education curricula for students,
nature and environmental camps, volunteer development camp and other camps.
To encourage partnership between business and communities for biodiversity

Monitoring,Documentation,
Protection
and Education

89

90

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		and to showcase best practices, RCE Cha-am has also participated in activities
related to the multistakeholder forum on biodiversity.
RCE Chandigarh is focused on understanding wetland ecosystems and the importance of wetlands, as well as providing opportunity for learning by doing, field experiences and hands-on training by exploring wetlands. One of their projects aims
to reach out to local communities from a grassroots level by inspiring students,
educators and district level officers of the state government to protect and conserve
wetlands. It works on preserving wetland ecosystems so as to preserve the important repository of biodiversity and ensure sustainable exploitation of resources
for environmental protection. The RCE partners hope that this project will help
improve public recognition of wetlands, encourage exploration into associatedlivelihood benefits and create sustainable development.
For its involvement in the Biodiversity Cyber Dialogue Project, RCE Chubu is using
a Social Networking Service (SNS). This is to develop a deeper common understanding of stakeholders in different regions of the world on the importance of
biodiversity, and the need for changing lifestyle choices and socio-economic institutions. The major impact of this initiative was cross-boundary, national and international mutual-learning among the members of civil society (especially among
members of the Japanese NGOs who have an interest in biodiversity ranging froma particular ecological issue to different social and economic aspects).
The cyber dialogue project and related collaborative projects with Japanese NGOs
gave the RCE an opportunity to expand its network to promote ESD with the concept of biodiversity as an entry point. Topics such as “Indigenous Peoples and Biodiversity”, “Gender and Biodiversity”, “Local Community Life and Biodiversity”
and “Traditional Wisdom and Biodiversity” have been crucial in the cyber discussions.
Knowledge of edible plants kept communities of Finland supplied with food during
difficult times of war and in postwar periods. Such knowledge, while remaining
relevant for the resilience of the society, has recently become important due toarrival of immigrants who are not familiar with various species of plants in Finland and, as a result, suffer from consumption of poisonous varieties. In one ofits projects, RCE Espoo aspires to educate the population about ways of using
herbs, fruits and mushrooms in a manner that enhances their well-being and, atthe same time, protects biodiversity. Expertise of different partners in biodiversity,
techniques of species identification, ability to present them visually as well as an understanding of the impact of various plants on health and ecosystems are reflectedin the teaching materials. These materials deal with questions of integration of
ecologically, economically and socially sustainable development. These materials
will be further used for creating new applications for NatureGate, an online learning platform used by schools and other partners in Finland.
RCE Kyrgyzstan is engaged in a program that aims at documenting and sustaining
traditional knowledge related to local ecosystems. Such practices are particularly
critical for maintaining the health of communities as well as of biodiversity, whichsuffers from exploitation by local and foreign users. As the first step of the program, the RCE partners have undertaken research to map the extent and type

Part II©
© BertBert Kaufmann_CC
Kaufmann_CC BY-SA
BY-SA 2.0
2.0

Conference on Traditional Medicine 2009
in Bangalore, India

91

92

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		of TK holders in the area, the methods they use, the extent of success of theirpractices and awareness of the local population of these traditional activities. The
knowledge obtained through the research, as well as contacts established in a process, will be used for creating awareness about TK practices and for developing
enabling conditions for the TK practitioners.

Worldviews andIntegration

An important question in the integration of TK and institutional knowledge systems
is the hegemonic relationship between these knowledge systems and the sociopolitical and methodological challenges in integrating and mainstreaming TK.
Institutions commonly assume that TK can and must be validated with the logicalpositivist epistemology of scientific institutions (Haverkort et al., 2003; Shankar& Unnikrishnan, 2004; Haverkort & Reijntjes, 2010). Jenkins (2000) notes how
modernization has dramatically devalued traditions by universalizing abstract
norms of action, valuing along with individualized patterns of socialization.
In these processes, tradition has often been seen as an impediment to progressor an ideal to return to so as to resolve the problems that modernity has brought.
The modernist attitude towards TK has been either modernize or disappear, withwhat reads as being the strongest and thus most coherent rationale (Couze &Featherstone, 2006). On the question of optimizing the tensions between present
and traditional, note that “older knowledge may be readmitted but subject to thecritical and skeptical judgment of a rational method, uncluttered by faith and dogmas” (Couze & Featherstone, 2006: 459).
In the efforts to achieve development, emphasis has been placed on economic
growth and related practices. In the same vein, the role of culture in contemporarysocieties has been examined through the lens of direct relevance to commercial
activity. Social analysis has been largely documented by rational behaviour models
that abstract economic action from the complex dynamics of its historical contexts (Jenkins, 2000) and without cognizance of the practice architectures, within
which these dynamics are inscribed and function (Kemmis & Mutton, 2012). For
example, cultural artifacts or art forms are seen as vehicles for economic empowerment with less focus on their contextual functions in and for the communities inquestion. Another example is the increasing focus on traditional medical drugs inbio-prospecting while neglecting the holistic dimension of traditional medicine.
There is also often an emphasis on aggregate growth rather than distributional
effects or equity.
A view of TK as unchanging inscription of antiquity, relegating it to the status ofa commodity that should be documented and preserved is a matter of concern.
The discourse has been centred on the protection of intellectual property rights,
often overlooking and neglecting a need to consider and strengthen the social andcultural processes of continuity and contemporary utility around such knowledge.
Whereas the documentation and preservation of TK (which are on the verge ofextinction with the receding of language diversity) are the need of the hour, thepromotion of contemporarily relevant TK and encouraging continued creativity
and dynamism are vital.

Part II

Traditional knowledge is often considered exotic and confined to indigenous communities. Whereas the presence of TK might be obvious in such communities,
sociological analysis amply reveals that such knowledge and related practices areembedded in all sections of society. However there may be a dominant influenceof social classes, caste or ethnic groups on such knowledge within the communities. There is also a contested idea that promotion of TK in certain sections ofsociety where modern science and technology benefits are not available or accessible, create double standards within a society and further deepen inequity in
less-developed countries.
RCE Espoo has initiated an innovative project called “Encounters”, led by Keinumaki´s school project with 40 other partners in the region. Encounters seeks to findways in which sustainable development and methods become rooted in the school’s
daily activities by developing methods that involve networking with local stakeholders, authorities, researchers and experts, and by choosing those pedagogicalmethods that support social interaction and participation and enrich the working
methods within the school’s learning environment. Various dimensions of sustainability such as local, social, technical and didactic-pedagogical aspects are explored for bettering learning in schools. Learning packages focus on ecological,
economic, social and cultural dimensions, and include aspects such as historicalmapping, cultural heritage, mapping of present environment, interactions withinformal learning centres such as national parks, and transforming schools into
learning domains for sustainable lifestyles
In Guatemala, 42 per cent of the population is indigenous. There are several challenges in the current education system. The government spends meagre resources
for education in the region, and the existing education system is a predominantly
Western model that ignores the traditional cultural wisdom. A transformativeeducation model which can ingrain values of cultural diversity and national identity within communities while fulfilling ambitions of scientific and technologicalcapacities of a developing country is a vital need. The Mayan cultural worldview
based on principles of sustainability fits well into this model. RCE Guatemala hastaken the lead in integrating this Mayan worldview in various levels and forms ofeducation. Wisdom dialogues and curriculum reforms are important strategies
for this program, with active networks of university faculty, school teacher andstudents, and community members.
Some of the practices of RCE Lima-Callao are based on the belief that contemporary educational systems do not consider knowledge and, as a result, are notcontextualized to the life of the indigenous communities in the area, thus contributing to a social imbalance and disenfranchisement. To integrate knowledge
and learning systems to support capacity development and livelihood practicesof the traditional communities while taking care about biodiversity, the RCE hasdeveloped a pilot course on biodiversity and intercultural knowledge with the indigenous Quechua Lamas community. The course development has been basedon transdisciplinary dialogue with indigenous communities, college teachers,
technicians and other stakeholders in the community. Building on the first successand experiences of other RCEs in Bogota, Guatemala, and Western Jalisco, the RCE
is exploring further innovative models of learning and development that bring
together areas of traditional knowledge, health and livelihoods in the AndeanAmazonian communities.

93

94

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		A major focus of RCE Kodagu’s biodiversity and TK-related activities is conservation of sacred groves through research and outreach programs. Their field programs involve livelihood initiatives through the promotion of bamboo cultivation,organic farming, creation of a forest protection battalion, ecosystem services
valuation, and educational initiatives in schools and colleges. Through Eco-clubs,
several schools and colleges have undergone training in the area of sacred grove
conservation. Identification, documentation and conservation of medicinal plants
and associated knowledge in the region is another thrust area. A heritage interpretation centre depicting the local cultural and biological diversity has also beencreated.
RCE Makana has become a hub for local organizations to collaborate in support ofenvironment and sustainability initiatives. What has been most notable is that issues
that range from water to biodiversity have each been found to have a local knowledge
practice that had been previously overlooked. An emphasis on biodiversity
conservation has thus become a matter of local importance to people and the environment. The RCE does not have funded projects but is a community-based initiative where funding can be pooled and change practices can be initiated at a levelthat local family resources allow, such as compost gardening and the planting of
indigenous food trees of cultural significance that serve to restore biodiversitybased food production and health in a small but significant process of indigenous
knowledge and practices recovery.

Learning in RCEs

The examples above demonstrate how, in the context of RCEs in Asia, Africa,
Europe and the Americas, different RCE stakeholders are able to express their concerns and address them through co-engaged practice and learning in developing
regionally appropriate solutions to the challenges of bio-cultural diversity. Such individual articulation and collective contextualization demonstrate the biodiversity
problematic (ranging from protection of species and ecosystems to poverty eradication, health and livelihood security), its relevance for the variety of stakeholders
and an opportunity that the RCE learning spaces could offer for mainstreaming
issues of biodiversity into the development agenda.

Part II

References
Archer, M. (2010). Conversations about reflexivity.
London: Routledge.
Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1994). Investing in cultural
capital for sustainable use of natural resources. In
S. Koskoff (Ed.), Investing in natural capital: The
ecological economics approach to sustainability.
Washington DC: Island Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. California:
Stanford University Press.
Breidlid, A. (2009). Culture, indigenous knowledge
systems and sustainable development: A criticalview of education in an African context. International Journal of Educational Development, 29, 140-148.
Cochrane, P. (2006). Exploring cultural capital andits importance in sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 57, 318-330.
Couze, V. & Featherstone, M. (2006). Modernity.
Theory, Culture and Society, 23 (2-3), 457-465.
Elias, N. (1987). Involvement and detachment.
New York: Basil Blackwell.
Elias, N. (1991). The symbol theory. London: Sage.
Haverkort, B., van’t Hooft, K. & Hiemstra, W. (Eds.).
(2003). Ancient roots new shoots. Leusden:
ETC/Compas and Zed Books.

Haverkort, B. (2006). Challenges for endogenousdevelopment and biocultural diversity. In B.
Haverkort & S. Rist (Eds.), Endogenous development
and biocultural diversity (pp. 24-44). Leusden: ETC/
Compas.
Haverkort, B. & Reijntjes, C. (2010). The diversityof worldviews, knowledge communities and scienceand the challenges of its co-evolution. In S. Subramanian & B. Pisupati (Eds.), Traditional knowledge
in policy and practice: Approaches to development andhuman wellbeing (pp. 12-30).Tokyo: UNU Press.
Ibisch, P.L., A. Vega E., & Herrmann,T.M. (Eds.).
(2010). Interdependence of biodiversity and development under global change. Technical Series No. 54.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity,
Montreal (2nd corrected ed.).
Jaramillo, L. (2010). Bio trade potential for growth andsustainability. UNCTAD/UNDP.
Jenkins, T.N. (2000). Putting postmodernity into
practice: Endogenous development and the role oftraditional cultures in the rural development of marginal regions. Ecological Economics, 34, 301-314.
Kemmis, S. & Mutton, R. (2012). Education for sustainability (EfS): Practice and practice architectures.
Environmental Education Research, 18 (2), 187-207.

95

96

Chapter 3 Traditional Knowledge and Biodiversity within Regional Centres ofExpertise on Education for Sustainable Development

		Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington,
DC: Island Press.

TEEB (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A
synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB.

Shankar, D. & Unnikrishnan, P.M. (Eds.) (2004).
Challenging the Indian medical heritage. New Delhi:
Foundation Books.

UNESCO (2001). UNESCO universal declaration on
cultural diversity. Paris: UNESCO.

Suneetha, M.S. & Balakrishna, P. (2009). Learningfrom the practitioners: Benefit sharing perspectives fromenterprising communities. UNU-IAS and UNEP.

UNESCO (2005). Convention on the protection andpromotion of the diversity of cultural expressions. Paris:
UNESCO.

Suneetha, M.S. & Balakrishna, P. (2010).
Biodiversity, sustainability and education: Are wedoing enough to connect the dots? Global Environmental Research, 14, 147-153.

WHO (2008). Traditional medicine. WHO Factsheet
no. 134 . Retrieved April 7, 2014 from http://www.
who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/

Suneetha, M.S., Hiemstra, W. & Verschuuren, B.
(2010). Bio-enterprises, endogenous development andwell-being. Yokohama: UNU-IAS.

Part II97

98

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Part II

Chapter 4

Learning and Innovation
for Greener and Socially
Just Societies
1

Zinaida Fadeeva and Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana

Shifting to a greener and more socially just economy to achieve a sustainable
society requires serious changes in production and consumption systems at the
local and global levels. Such changes call for development of new competences and capabilities in all sectors of society, including the market, government
and voluntary sectors. These competences and capabilities, while including
employment, are also concerned more generally with livelihood and lifestyleand the comprehensive learning most adequately characterized as ESD. ESD
requires long-term and systems thinking, dealing with complexities, and working in partnerships. It also entails specific knowledge related to areas of one’s
personal and professional life that impact local and global communities andecosystems.

1 This chapter was developed on the basis of the editorial published in Payyappallimana, U. & Fadeeva, Z. (Eds). (2013). Innovation in local
and global learning systems for sustainability: Towards more sustainable consumption and production systems and sustainable livelihoods. Learning
Contributions of the Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development. Yokohama: UNU-IAS.

99

100

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

While it is important to develop new knowledge, learning, and innovation withineach economic sector and other organizational sectors, the challenge of working
across sectors and disciplines has to be addressed. More sustainable consumption
and production (SCP) systems require redefining the boundaries of traditional
responsibilities between producers and consumers, regulators and those being
regulated, and innovators and innovation users within the marketplace. At thesame time, each of these market-based solutions can be significantly bolsteredand some may, in fact, depend on autonomous or collaborative innovation byother sectors (including higher education, government, and non-profit organizations). This type of innovation would rely on the traditional strengths found in eachof the corresponding models of production of the respective sector (in this case,scholarship within higher education, citizenship within one’s country, and volunteerism within the not-for-profit sector). Such inter-organizational innovationis concretely expressed in the global development of the RCEs that are enabling
new forms of regional learning opportunities through the formation of grassroots,
multisectoral regional partnerships.
In a drive towards more sustainable development, it is critically important to revisit the meaning and ultimate goals of productive relations in modern society fromthe perspective of quality of life and ecosystem health. These goals are, in turn,embodied in the idea of sustainable livelihoods and well-being for all – both now
and in the future.
While ESD principles and outcomes have to be instilled in all educational, training and action initiatives to inform how green growth is understood and implemented, several areas require particular attention. The authors of this chapter
explore these areas, paying specific regard to the examples of multistakeholder
actions by RCEs in different parts of the world.

Critical Areas of
Change: Towards
a green, resilientand just society

Twenty years after the Earth Summit of 1992, governments, international organizations and other major groups came together in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to discuss
measures to address issues of sustainable resource use, decent and meaningful
work, and eradication of poverty. One of the key themes that has dominated theofficial discussions is how to develop a green economy that enables a dignified life
for millions of poor people while charting possible development paths that are notenvironmentally destructive.
The discourse of green growth covers a variety of complex areas related to the topics
of sustainable production and consumption. These include lifestyle choices, green
skills acquired through technical and vocational education and training (TVET),
green industries, governance for a greener economy, and sustainable livelihoods,
to name just a few. The complexity of the issues, also reflected by multiple definitions of green economy and green growth, has produced different interpretationsof the intended scope and ability of a green economy to address the current challenges of development. Often, the discourse of green growth remains too narrowas it assumes that solutions to sustainability are focused on innovations led by
the marketplace, particularly by existing large players. As a result, many criticalactors remain unchanged and processes under-utilized. For example, discussionsof the green economy tend to underemphasize the need for the generation ofPart II

Entrepreneurship
Consumer
empowerment

Innovations

Green
industries

SCP and
Green GrowthGreenskillsSustainable
lifestyle andlivelihoods

Growingfrom within
Governance

Figure 4.1 Elements of SCP andGreen Growth Agenda

new enterprises, innovation by existing small and medium-sized companies, anddevelopment by alternative market organizations (such as cooperatives and credit
unions). They tend to overlook consideration of market strategies that favour thecompetitiveness of the poor and the most vulnerable and those without access toresources. Most importantly, a dominant focus on market processes leaves aside
the need for non-market strategies – critical especially in cases of market failure –including those led by various levels of government and other non-market players.
As a result, many alternative development approaches, such as endogenous development, remain on the fringes, even when holding critical potential for greener,
more just and resilient societies.
The authors consider the concept of green growth more critically. Rather thanseeing it as a general view that all market growth is good when it meets minimal
environmental standards (with social aspirations assumed to be addressed merely
through such growth), this chapter examines and evaluates green growth in the
broader context of sustainable development, focusing on the forms of economic
growth that are most conducive to sustainable development’s overarching goals.
Generally, a green economy cannot be seen as simply a market with greener products replacing less environmentally-friendly alternatives; rather it is an emergent
challenge to advance diverse local development that leads to improved resilience ofmarkets and equitable societies as a whole, with ongoing improvements in qualityof life in times of substantial global change.

101

102

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Understanding
long and shortterm opportunities
or sustainableproducts andservices

Drawing on local
resources

Multiplicity ofinnovations(including
communitybased)

Deepeningcross-sectoral
relations
Deepening
relations alongsupply chain

Innovation
for green
economyGoing
beyondinformation
provision
only

Developing
institutionalframeworks

Addressing
societal norms
and behaviours

Figure 4.2 Critical Areas for Stimulating
Innovations for the Green Economy

This chapter demonstrates the role of learning for sustainable development, basedon the principles of ESD, in transitioning towards a greener and sustainable society.
While focusing on ideas and actions within the traditional market discourse, theauthors also consider the need to engage solutions involving those traditionally
excluded from productive activities, those who could, if provided with necessary assets and capabilities, develop more sustainable livelihood practices for themselves
and their broader community.
The chapter begins by bringing to the fore various challenges of transitioning
towards a green economy and by discussing how ESD is able to support working
with these challenges. It will assist development of an appreciation of the potential of learning for sustainability enhanced by reference to practical examples developed by RCEs in various regions of the world, and the positive outcomes ofregional and global networking of these RCEs through a multilateral platform.

Box 4.1
Innovative Practices for a
Greener Economy
RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape
(South Africa)
Through encouraging collaborative initiatives
among its partners, RCE Makana and Ruralcont.

Innovations for the Green Economy:
Including local and global
Market prices of goods and services, in the majorityof cases, do not reflect environmental and social externalities that occur along their life cycle. While information on the negative and positive effects given
to various stakeholders is important, for example, toindividual consumers and those engaged in organiza-

Part IItional purchasing, more fundamental changes in societal norms and behaviours as well as developing
new relations along production value chains are required.Understanding challenges of modern production-consumption systems needs to be combined withthe ability to recognize opportunities for innovation,
often spanning traditional sectoral and geographic
boundaries dividing economic and social players (including consumers and producers). Finally, and fundamentally, the ability to create and sustain an institutional framework that is conducive for transition toa sustainably developed society requires continuous
learning and innovation.
What consumption and production systems would
look like within a green economy is not yet clearly understood. Nor can they be conceptualized universallyfor different regions. Understanding the need for particular and customized patterns of development andgrowth (involving market and non-market forms of
production and investments in each type) will require
enormous collective innovation and learning. Production and consumption systems need to emerge
from the multiplicity of change practices initiated bycommunities on the basis of immediately available
resources within communities. This is reflected in actions taken by RCEs.
RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape in South Africa(Box 4.1) supports a Saturday market to strengthen
local production and consumption while RCE Lucknow in India assists in the development of productive forest resource-based livelihood activities by theTharu indi-genous community. Both initiatives contribute to small-scale, low or no-cost innovations thathave triggered new production-consumption relations
leading to local sustainable development. Education
has a special role to play in sustaining such processes.
By involving situated learning drawing on the knowledge, history and resources of the communities involved, peopleand organizations have been empowered to look beyond those possibilities immediately
given by existing market systems of consumption andproduction. Governance of such innovative market
processes, akin to governance innovations provided
by RCEs themselves, secures continuity of learning
processes and synergies with other developments, including existing forms, in each region.

Eastern Cape contribute to the developmentof a range of change-practice approaches
that set out to explore what could be done toimprove quality of life with resources available
in the region’s communities. The projects,
ranging from initiation of a bicycle-based
small business for cleaning and composting
to support for local Saturday markets, arebeing developed on the assumption thatchange for more SCP practices has to comefrom direct engagement of people in change
practices (changing to learn) rather than froma simple reliance on awareness and knowledgetransfer expected to trigger actions (learning
to change).
Small scale projects of the RCE, oriented toa “no or low cost” way of doing things, have
led to a variety of innovations, in turn triggering new activities. These have led not only to
livelihood improvements for the poor but also
have demonstrated their ability to contributeto low carbon and low pollution practices,along with rejuvenation of traditional knowledge and improvement of quality of life.
RCE Lucknow (India)
Collaboration of governmental departments,
academic institutions, NGOs and schools
through RCE Lucknow enabled critical engagement with the Tharu tribe of the Dudhwa
region in relation to the natural resource management (NRM) plan for the area. The lands
traditionally used by the Tharu indigenous
community were designated as a national parkin 1977. This led to the change in resource
use patterns of the community and, eventually, to conflicts with the authorities. The main
objective of the NRM project was to establish
a balance in development through introducing
livelihood activities for the Tharu people
that, at the same time, lead to preservationof biodiversity. Multiple planning meetings
engaging the community and professionals(in agricultural and livestock practices, conservation, market and handicraft development, energy efficiency, and education) led
to mapping of local resource flows as well as
identification of activities for socioeconomic
cont.

103

104

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

uplift of the community. Learning about interdependencies of the natural and human systems, understanding entrepreneurship opportunities, and developing skills for food,energy and craft production were the foci ofthe project. Capacity development has been
designed with consideration of appropriate
learning pedagogies centred on realities of
the indigenous community and aiming at
improving their quality of life. Participationof the local community, especially of womenand children, has contributed to a quicker
uptake of these practices and a greater
sense of community ownership.

Entrepreneurship for Sustainable
Development
Entrepreneurship has been acknowledged as a major
contributor to production of sustainable products andservices as well as innovative processes. It is also a strategy for providing livelihood opportunities for many
regions, in both developing and developed countries,
which experience economic and social hardship.

The critical role of entrepreneurship in a green economy and socially just society is attributed to entrepreneurs, often through small and medium-sizedcompanies, demonstrating significant flexibility inaddressing emerging issues with a high degree ofinnovation. Education of entrepreneurs that workwith sustainability problems (for example, vulnerability and poverty, social inequality and environmental degradation) could itself become a launching padfor new business development. Such education is required to enable individuals,
communities and organizations to produce viable alternatives to existing production-consumption systems that fail to adequately address issues of improving the quality of life for all over the long-term and/or cause environmental deterioration along the supply chain. They also need to facilitate development ofcompetencies that lead to exploiting such identified
business opportunities by creating new enterprises
or altering existing ones. Entrepreneurial education
Box 4.2and support is needed to help identify business opDevelopment of Sustainableportunities for producing improved or new products,
Entrepreneurshipprocesses and services as well as securing conditions
for new systems of production and consumption supRCE Delhi (India)
plemented by or through synergies with other sectors
RCE Delhi operates in an urban area faced(such as government, faith organizations, the nonwith a number of problems related to poverty,
profit sector, and policy and programmatic change ininadequate infrastructure, pollution and waste,these respective organizations).
to name just a few. Partners of the RCE see
empowerment of women in poor communiFor example, entrepreneurship practices of RCEties by increasing their livelihood choices as
Delhi (Box 4.2) have focused on the development ofa necessity and an opportunity. Project CARE
livelihood opportunities for women in resource-poor(Creating Awareness, Skills and Responsibiurban communities. Considerable effort of the RCE
lities towards the Environment) seeks to enpartners and the communities it represents were
gage college students and young professiospent on identification of for-profit market oppornals from Accenture in skills development for
tunities built on a strategy of initially identifying relow-income urban communities in environsources (from waste materials) and potential markets
mentally vulnerable locations. Through particifor products made from these (e.g. handicrafts, bags,
patory actions, the project identified wasteetc.). In addition, skills needed for their production
materials that could be immediately madeand distribution were also identified. The success ofavailable for conversion into potential prothe project is a result of collective efforts of organiducts such as handicrafts and paper bags. Enzations enabling strategic analysis of the entrepreneurgagement of various partners (including reial opportunities (by higher education institutions),
searchers assisting in understanding profiles
learning of new capabilities (by NGOs) and creation ofof these communities, NGOs facilitating idencont.

Part IITransformationof entrepreneurial
education

Support for
SMEs

Addressing
livelihoods

Synergies
with other(non-market)
sectors

Entrepreneurship forsustainable
developmentt

Creating viable
development
alternatives

Skillsdevelopment

Strategic
work onidenticationof market andnon-market opportunities

Figure 4.3 Critical Areas for Entrepreneurshipfor Sustainable Development

appropriate institutional conditions (by governmental
departments). Efforts of RCE Vienna (Box 4.2) in empowering sustainability entrepreneurs is grounded in
the collective learning process leading, among otheroutcomes, to discoveries of additional entrepreneurial opportunities. The critical element of the projectis enabling innovations that are conceived within thewalls of academia to enter markets while influencing
sustainable development of this cross-border region.

Greener Skills and more Sustainable
Technical and Vocational Education
and Training
The formal education system (including elementary,
secondary and post-secondary education) and TVET
systems have to reflect the needs of restructuring the
economy towards greener and more socially just societies. Transitions would lead to structural changes
in the industrial sectors through trained professionals. This would include diminishing the number ofso-called “brown” industries characterized by theirhigh degree of pollution. This requires greening ofexisting industrial processes to enable the emergenceof new, sustainable industrial systems. Greening of
TVET is also seen as a strategy to bring more dignity
to the jobs available in a variety of productive sectors
due to the socially laudable goals associated with sus-

tification of the necessary skills and lead-ing
processes for their development, and youth
working on continuation of the process) leads
to opportunities for low-income women to
become innovative entrepreneurs.
RCE Vienna
RCE Vienna works in the densely populated region located between two European capitals– Vienna and Bratislava. The flagship projectof the RCE aims at development of regional
entrepreneurs who perform sustainablebusiness activities through creation, renewal
or improvement of products, services, technologies or organizational processes. Suchbusiness actions are expected to accentuate
long-lasting positive impacts on social, ecological, communal and cultural aspects forregional sustainability. The first phase of the
project strives to identify sustainability entrepreneurs, understand critical factors that impact their actions, and design processes thatlead to support and up-scaling of sustainable
entrepreneurship in the region. The partners
who represent academia, private sector andcivil society organizations are particularly
focused on translating knowledge of academia into innovative sustainable production
processes.

105

106

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Continuous
learning

Capacitybuilding
Social/ecologicalgoals

Technical andvocational
education

Educator/trainercompetency

Localsystems andcommunityneedsGreen skills

Communityemployer
interactions

Public-private
partnerships
Addressing
brain drain

Figure 4.4 Critical Areas for Green Skills Development

tainability and a greater acknowledgement and legitimacy for TVET. At the sametime, a focus on the social and ecological goals of sustainability often affirms theunderlying ethical or normative goals of technical and vocational training andother forms of professional training. These ethical goals linked to particular occupations, for example, are reflected in the nursing profession and its goal ofhealthcare or the engineering profession and its goal of efficiently and effectively
using materials in achieving useful outputs. These projected changes require development of each educational sector in collaboration with other educators withthe aim of the emergence of TVET and tertiary programs that are aligned withsustainability outcomes.
In order to develop TVET that provides education for millions of workers able tobring sustainability skills into existing and emerging work places, there is a need tointegrate local, regional, national and global sustainability issues related to specificoccupational specializations. Such issues would need to be discussed by major
stakeholders, including communities and potential employers. The educational
processes of TVET have to consider developing local, place-based learning opportunities exposing technical and vocational trainees to local ecosystems and community needs. Such place-based education as well as future employment success,to a large extent, depends on the development of skills that go beyond technical competencies and includes an understanding of complexities, problem-solving and ability to work with various sectors and stakeholders across the supply chain. Among
critical issues that TVET faces today is a question of challenges that graduatesof the TVET system might face if employed in various world regions. Professional
out-migration, strong in such professions as nursing, engineering or construction, requires understanding of not only a broad range of development challenges
but impacts of the international movement of such professionals.

Part II

While agreement on the right competencies and approaches for development areimportant, the critical issue becomes developing competencies for educators andtrainers of TVET. In addition to the specific programs oriented to capacity development of TVET educators, learning could also be facilitated by closer collaboration
between TVET and technology development sectors (including other higher
education organizations and community innovators), governments (providing
coordination of educational and development strategies), and industries (providing opportunities for employment and investment in new sectors). Transition to
the green economy would also benefit from the TVET sector enabling development of sustainability competencies and access to the market for traditionally disadvantaged groups and those needing assistance. As sustainability challenges areof an evolving nature, such education would need to
be seen as a continuous process.
Box 4.3
An example of the development of sustainable TVET
Work of RCEs in the Areapractices in conjunction with other educational andof Sustainable TVET
local partners is found in the Riverfarm project of
RCE Greater Western Sydney in Australia (Box 4.3).
RCE Greater Western Sydney (Australia)
The Hawkesbury Riverfarm in Australia is aThis multistakeholder project developed around theflagship project of RCE Greater Western Sydidea of revitalizing the Hawkesbury Riverfarm, which,ney and a living laboratory for learning andin turn, led to the development of new types of learnaction-research being developed on Sydney’s
ing for a variety of learners (ranging from the priHawkesbury River. The University of Westernmary and secondary level to post-secondary education
Sydney Hawkesbury Riverfarm Educationand other higher education partners). Among themCentre is transforming this culturally historic
were the students of the Western Sydney Institute ofsite into a unique real-world learning and reTechnical and Further Education (TAFE WSI). These
search resource, linking land, food, culture
pre-apprentice carpentry, electrical and plumbing stuand water. Partners of RCE Greater Westerndents, under the supervision of their teachers, engaSydney focus on the development of student
ged in community-based learning to gain key developskills for ecosystem appraisal as well as adment skills leading to the rejuvenation and renovation
vancing capabilities and green skills identiof the historic Riverfarm site. The action education andfied in their respective national vocational
research takes place in synergy with other projects
education and training packages. The project
undertaken by the New South Wales Department ofis an innovative example of how institutions
Education and Communities, the Brewongle Environof primary and secondary, post-secondary
mental Education Centre, the Hawkesbury Nepeanand higher education can work in a coordinaCatchment Management Authority, the Darug Custed way to support the implementation of thetodian Aboriginal Corporation and the Hawkesbury
new national curriculum in the area and foster
Alumni Charter. These activities aim at understanding
learning pathways towards greener economy
and supporting historical, cultural and natural characand sustainable learning.
teristics of the farm site and development of new learning strategies for regional sustainable development.
RCE Hamburg (Germany)
Ultimately, they address new ways of professional
Among the challenges addressed by the parteducation fitting into an agenda of green growth andners of RCE Hamburg is a need for educasustainable market and non-market practices. Thetion and training that leads to the adoption
project has notably been recognized by The Skills forof low-carbon technologies. While this is a
Sustainability – Educational Institution Award.
challenge for many sectors, energy efficiency
in construction and building, both for newly
The three-year BauNachhaltig project of RCE Hamburgdeveloped buildings as well as those going(Box 4.3) also focuses on a transformation of TVET.
cont.

107

108

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

through retrofitting, is critical. Recognizing
technical and vocational training as a key foraddressing this challenge, nine competence
centres for professional training in building
and energy within the nationwide KOMZET
network have joined together as part of thethree-year BauNachhaltig (BuildSustainable)
project.
The project is based on the premise that highquality construction is a prerequisite for sustainability and vice versa. It focuses on thedevelopment of learning materials and pedagogies that contribute to various professions and other sectors involved in sustainable construction. The project is supported by
the faculty of Applied Building Technology atthe Hamburg University of Technology, theFederal Institute for Vocational Training (Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung) and the Federal
Ministry for Education and Research (Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung). It isclosely informed by the experiences of small
and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the construction sector, which remain critical project
partners.

GreenIndustries

In particular it addresses the need to simultaneously
develop skills and systems for the more sustainable
low-carbon construction sector in Germany. At thecore of the project is an initiative of the nine KOMZET
competence centres for professional training in building and energy. A key goal is to develop TVET learningmaterials based on sustainability principles in relation
to housing. The project demonstrated the critical importance of partnerships in learning and innovation toward more sustainable building practices. With a focus
on particular construction elements within a complex
unified project, along with individual craftspeople
coming together, awareness-raising concerning theoverall system effects of individual decisions took
place. In this way, quality becomes defined from asustainability perspective and embedded in practice.
Interestingly, learning is required not only among
the professionals developing the buildings but, in thecase of complex projects such as “passive houses”, theusers who eventually own the homes. With the ambitious goal of substantially contributing to low-carbon
development, the project has identified a need to go
beyond the field of technical and vocational education
to engage other businesses within the building sector,
along with planners, investors and private individuals.

The previous discussion can help lead to a re-envisioning of what green industries
might need to look like in the 21st century and how learning and education canpromote transitioning to more sustainable modes of SCP. For example, from astructural perspective, it highlights elements of how green industries that support SCP – and, more generally, the concept and identity of sustainable lifestyles
and livelihoods – will need to be structured or re-structured. This is especiallythe case if, as it has been argued, these are important elements or preconditions
for viable and successful green industries. Educationally, it points out how newforms of learning and scholarship for sustainability associated with intersectoral,collaborative partnerships at regional levels (exemplified by RCEs), new technicalsustainability education for TVET, and broad consumer and public education forsustainable development, can affect internal education and training systems ofindustries.
From an institutional perspective, considerable production innovations along with
innovations in administrative norms and practices may need to take place. An
evolutionary or gradual approach can focus on internal measures that optimize
existing systems. These might include cleaner forms of production and moresustainable product and service design reflecting, in turn, underlying principles
of systems thinking that enable the long-term functionality of products. It may
also be that additional dynamic institutional changes within industries need totake place that allow industries to fully take advantage of new social capacities
and expectations emerging in societies committed to sustainable development.

Part II

109

110

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Cleanerand sustainableproduction

Work onenvisioning
green
industries

Upscalingsustainableproduction
practices

Alternative
market forms

Production,
administrativeand institutionalinnovations

Cross-sectoral
engagements

Green
industries

Inclusive
approach(e.g. engagementwith poor marginalized groups)

Redening
consumerproducer
relationsPublic-private
partnerships

Figure 4.5 Critical Areas forDevelopment of Green Industries

Such transformative market features could be analogous to the institutional transformations (and benefits) associated with the historic democratization of governments and the broad citizen education that accompanied these changes. These institutional innovations seem to be already occurring to some extent, for example,
in the area of corporate social responsibility (CSR) that envisions a broader stakeholder and citizen accountability beyond traditional investor profit maximizationand shareholder supremacy. The emergence of alternative market forms takes
advantage of changes in market preferences tied to sustainable development outcomes (creating new opportunities for the self-employed along with the formationof SMEs and cooperatives).
Regardless of the magnitude and scope of industrial change needed for green industries, the following components are likely to be necessary. At one level is a basic contextual knowledge and understanding of environmental and social trends
and their drivers and impacts. In addition is a need for knowledge and experience
with new technologies broadly understood. This can include new types of tools
and equipment along with new instruments for evaluation, such as Life Cycle Assessment. There is, furthermore, a need to be able to integrate capacities, acrossdisciplines and other dimensions, to be able to respond to opportunities that arisethat might not have been predicted but are market opportunities nonetheless.
This requires the ability to have some spare capacity and flexibility along withpositive relationships internally and externally with other organizations to be responsive while reducing adverse risks. If there is a concern with every individual
having a sustainable livelihood (part of which is fulfilled through market participation) one needs to also develop market conditions that encourage market entry by
new players, particularly those typically left out of the market, along with the pos-Part IIEngagingwith lessengaged(Disabled, young
children)

Increased
integration of
production andconsumption
Ethicalconsumers

Information

Alternative
market andnon-market
options

Improved
consumerrecognition

Consumer
empowerment

Participatory
product
conceptualization

ConsumerrightsFostering
relationships
betweenconsumers
and producers

Figure 4.6 Critical Areas for Consumer Empowerment

sibilities for their competitive success and viability over the long-term. In termsof addressing poverty and vulnerability, there is a need to encourage SMEs anddifferent forms of community enterprise (such as cooperatives) given the current
role and extent of markets in meeting people’s needs and aspirations.
This is especially important given the increasingly
constrained levels of social support provided by governments in many countries. One needs to systematically
explore the competitive advantages of these enterprises in the context of specific social and ecosystemsettings and the possible educational and community
investments needed to advance such enterprises.
At one level, there is a need to optimize current SME
practices making them greener, safer and more
rewarding places to work. Given the limited resourcesof SMEs and the importance of human and social
capital in small firms, there is an important role forpartnerships and strategic engagement with SMEs byother organizational partners using inclusive formsof participation. These forms of participation may, inturn, not only allow for improvements in the qualityof products and services provided by SMEs but also a
way of developing various forms of social capital andshared physical capital and technologies that improvenew and existing SME competitiveness.

Box 4.4
Engagement of RCEs in
Consumer Education
RCE Skåne (Sweden)
Sustainable food systems is a flagship projectof RCE Skåne. The region is famous, among
other qualities, for its agricultural production. Having in mind these characteristics, theschools of Malmö (the largest city of the region) decided to help re-shape the regional
food systems giving priority to organic local
producers. Targeted at communities in the
Malmö municipality, the project focuses on
increasing organic food in school meals.
Malmö, being a certified municipality as afair-trade city, facilitates multilevel actions
and programs. In this program, building links
between organic farmers and schools createsa new supply chain. Community learning is
initiated in the process through workshops,
teacher training on ood, and SCP perspeccont.

111

112

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

tives linked to local, regional as well as global
dimensions. Regional ESD initiatives offereda suitable strategy for re-orienting consumption-production systems that are contextuallysituated. The ambitious goal of eventually reaching 100 per cent organic school meals, required collaboration of schools, universities,
the municipality and families of schoolchildren. A combination of research, publications,education and network building supports thisongoing transition.
RCE Kitakyushu (Japan)
Activities of RCE Kitakyushu, located in western Japan, are characterized by a broad outreach to the community based on a historyof citizen activism. The project aims at enabling young consumers (in particular young
children and children with disabilities) to understand food and potentially make responsible purchasing decisions in the future. This
project came from the experience of a housewife who found that food at a grocery store
came from countries she had never visited.
The group of RCE partners representing universities, schools and citizen groups began
to work on food with special attention to thepromotion of local consumption of local products and the concept of food mileage toreduce CO2 emissions. In the course of two
years of innovating, workshops at schools,
university classes, community centres andnursery schools, as well as testing suggested
approaches, the RCE has developed a package of materials and strategies consisting of asimulation game centred on a hamburger shop,
along with a puppet show and excursions tofood-growing farms. While the work aimed atincluding children with disabilities to be able
to live their own lives as members of society
by sharing their experiences and creating
empathy, it has also influenced developersfrom various sectors, as well as the children’s
families and schools.

Consumer Education
To consume sustainably, citizens and organizations
have to be empowered to act upon information on
the environmental and social impacts of products andservices they consume. These impacts include the distribution of economic and other benefits from those
supplying the product or service. Actions would range
from giving preference to more sustainable productand service options in meeting a particular need or
preference, to engaging in and developing alternativemeans of addressing these needs (whether market or
non-market) if these are optimal, not only in avoiding
social and environmental damage but also promoting
well-being and human and ecosystem resilience. It isalso evident that a clear division of the role of consumers to consume and producers to produce would haveto be questioned as consumers themselves become
increasingly recognized as part of the performance of
products and services. Smart housing or transportation
systems depend on the actions of the users who, quite
naturally, need to be engaged at the earliest possible
stages of product conceptualization. Such increased
integration of production and consumption requires
not only new understandings of the principles of system operations but increasingly fostering relationships (accompanied by shared commitments) between
consumers and producers in product innovation,
testing, and use. Learning will also be required inother sectors, for example, to encourage consumers as
citizens to join political processes that champion theirrights as consumers, to help eliminate corruption
and anti-competitive practices, and to promote regulation and purchasing policies that ensure a higher
ecological and production standard while not creating
barriers to SMEs and marginalized groups.

To become an active, sustainability-conscious consumer, one has to know not only the impact of products andservices along their respective supply chain, but also
have an ability to engage in actions and practices thatlead to minimization of environmental impacts andmaximization of sustainable livelihood opportunities
locally and globally. As an example, RCE Tongyeong
in South Korea and its partners aimed at minimization of food waste thereby challenging the level of waste traditionally accepted by
Korean people. They approached the issue at a system level working with schools
as well as other partners, providing both conceptual and practical support. A
further example comes from Sweden. Recognizing the power of the public sector
to create a pull towards sustainable consumption, RCE Skåne (Box 4.4) facilitatedPart IIa project that aims at development of a new regional organic food supply chain.
Their ambitious goal to provide 100 per cent organic meals in schools led to thedevelopment of knowledge transfer and actions by multiple RCE partners. This
included schoolchildren, their parents, teachers, universities and municipalities.
Learning materials, research, awareness campaigns and supply chain innovations
led to a significant increase in organic food consumption at the regional schools.
Mainstreaming sustainable consumption requires engagement with those thattraditionally may not have been learning about opportunities and challenges associated with the topic of sustainable consumption. A further example of engaging
on this topic involves disabled youth and very young children. RCE Kitakyushu inJapan is working in a region designated in 2011 by the OECD as a green growthmodel city. The partners have developed educational materials based around the
topic of sustainable food and include excursions to farms, simulation games andtheatre by focusing on the production of hamburgers. The pedagogy enables participants to think of food-related issues such as health, transportation, economic
impact and well-being based on real-life local experiences as compared to a moreconventional educational model.

Connected but not limited to the issue of consumer education are sustainable
lifestyles and livelihoods. The idea of a livelihood goes beyond specific market
choices by individuals and households for particular products and services. Livelihood also includes participating in productive and other social activities outside of
the market. It also requires understanding that well-being can be undermined byoverconsumption by those who are economically wealthy while addressing underconsumption by those lacking the financial means to purchase or lacking local market options for valued goods and services. Related to one’s ability to purchase is one’s
ability to earn market income (whether through employment, self-employment,
or strategic investments) that builds one’s asset base, broadly understood. This can
include various forms of capital: physical/human-made capital, financial, social,human and natural capital. A livelihood also includes knowledge of how one canstrategically use one’s individual and collective assets in non-market ways to achieve livelihood goals valued by the individual. The ability to manage risk by reducing
one’s own vulnerability (the exposure of one’s assets to various hazards) is central
to sustaining one’s livelihood and should be pursued in a way that does minimal
or no harm and preferably strengthens the livelihoods of others. Products andservices can also be purchased that help reduce vulnerability. Education is critical, especially education that encourages livelihood strategies and use of materials
advancing sustainable lifestyles and livelihoods over the long-term as well as larger
scale project and process interventions (such as market engagement of producers
and consumers) that simultaneously advance related livelihoods within a community.
In developing learning and innovation systems conducive for this issue, awareness by individuals of diverse market and non-market livelihood strategies alongwith identification of one’s personal and community asset base that can be mobilized to advance these strategies is key. Normally, a critical skill-set is needed forthe periodic mapping of regional/communal assets and productive possibilities

Promotion andDevelopment of
Sustainable
Lifestyles andLivelihoods

113

114

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Awareness
unsustainable
practices andcriticalthinking

Market andnon-market
dimensions

Periodic
mapping ofregional/
communal
assetsInstitutional
barriers
Transformativetechnologies

Promotingethical andequitable
livelihoods andparameters

Sustainable
lifestyle andlivelihoods

Programs
for poor andmarginalized

Valueseducation
on livelihood
goals andwell-being

Figure 4.7 Critical Areas for
Sustainable Lifestyle and Livelihoods

in relation to existing and emerging livelihood opportunities in one’s community(and in relation to other communities and markets). Such learning is reflected in a
strategy of RCE Lucknow in India. This RCE is in the process of developing livelihood opportunities for indigenous communities in the Dudhwa region. Identification of community assets enabling the production of food, energy and crafts
has been done in collaboration with organizations knowledgeable in the areasof conservation, lifestyle practices, energy, and markets. A further RCE strategy
has been to systematically identify sustainability issues impacting livelihoods ina region and collaboratively develop supporting educational materials with other
RCEs. RCE Cairo, for example, has worked with several RCEs in Europe to develop school kits focusing on themes impacting livelihoods in Egypt including
sustainable and unsustainable behaviours, agriculture, biodiversity, energy, andwater (Box 4.5). RCE Graz-Styria (Box 4.5) demonstrated another advantage of
the RCEs to tap into the knowledge resources of the region. Utilizing presence ofseveral universities in the area, it brought together capacity of researchers and thestudents in developing more sustainable services in the area.
Education is also needed regarding institutional barriers to sustainable livelihood
practices (such as corruption, or policies, regulations, and programs preventing or
undermining the implementation of new sustainability technologies or livelihood
strategies favoured by the poor and vulnerable). One also has to educate on how
to strategically eliminate these barriers. In addition, individuals and communities
need education about unsustainable livelihood practices that create adverse risks
and harm to others. More positively, education for sustainable livelihoods includes
the following:

Part II

• Education regarding specific transformative technologies whose implementation
can create market and non-market livelihood opportunities – especially for those
who are worst off.
• Education that promotes critical thinking so individuals can identify and assess
the relative merits of various livelihood strategies in achieving their livelihood
goals.
• Values education to enable individuals to understand various livelihood goals in
the context of individual and community well-being, broadly understood.
• Values education regarding ethical parameters that shape one’s choice of livelihood strategies (for example, strategies promoting the dignity of others – both
now and in the future), valuing overall equity between livelihoods, and ethicalvalues encouraging respect for habitats and ecosystems.
One RCE strategy aiming to advance the range of livelihood options open to individuals by sharing and revaluing equipment within communities in its region
is demonstrated by RCE Saskatchewan in Canada(Box 4.5). The Sharing Productive Capital Project is anapplied research project led by the RCE with the support of Luther College at the University of Regina, theUniversity’s Department of Computer Science, andthe Craik Sustainable Learning Project. People andorganizations in the region are seeking to volunteer
productive capital, such as machines, tools and buildings, while software is being proposed to keep track of
the available assets. Participants in the project learn
about their place in systems of consumption and production by advancing local production opportunities
while treating equipment shared in the community
with higher standards of care, where equipment istreated as having its own dignity and being worthy ofrespect (akin to a citizen). While RCE Saskatchewan is
focusing on educational strategies centred on specifictypes of equipment, RCE Rhine-Meuse is developing
critical learning processes around key themes identified in the region (such as food, water and building)that allow real world, open collaboration among adiverse set of organizations (Box 4. 5). RCE Cebu in
the Philippines is also developing new productive activities for the community tied to ecosystem services
provided by the only remaining forest on the island.
The forest, which faced extinction owing to slash andburn practices, was studied by researchers at the University of Cebu and members of the local community,
who identified ecosystem services capable of providing alternative employment related to tourism andBox 4.5
Promoting and Developing
Sustainable Livelihoods
RCE Cairo (Egypt)
RCE Cairo has demonstrated how to mobilize
the strengths of the global RCE consortium toaddress local needs in developing educationin SCP. The partners of RCE Cairo analyzed
national needs and capabilities to meet ESD
and SD challenges as well as applying innovative pedagogical solutions developed by
and with other RCEs to Egyptian livelihood
realities. The outcomes of the project, which
include a range of innovations from developing materials and pedagogies to designing
programs for the education of teachers incountries where other partner RCEs operate,
demonstrate the opportunities for mobilization of global and local expertise andeffective capacity development practices for
SCP.
RCE Graz-Styria (Austria)
RCE Graz-Styria works in a region characterized
by old industrial areas, mining and rural areas
affected by migration and unemployment,alongside regions prospering from the automotive industry, tourism and the effects ofcentral urban areas like the city of Graz. Four
universities (major employers in the area)
were concerned with the relative lack of sustainability actions in the region. In response,
cont.

115

116

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

initiatives were developed among their own
staff and students under the “Sustainability4U”
process. Through various activities, the University of Graz, the University of Technology Graz,
the Medical University Graz, and the Universityof Music and Performing Arts Graz (together,a 40,000-strong student population), hope toengage students and the community in actions
leading to better livelihood opportunities in theregion and beyond. Several projects have beendeveloped, including “UniMobil_4U” aiming
to improve bicycle routes and paths between
the four universities, as well as a project integrating theoretical learning for sustainability (delivered through, for example, a lecture series
open to all universities) that has yielded practical actions contributing to sustainability.
RCE Saskatchewan (Canada)Partners of RCE Saskatchewan are developing
two initiatives that will help address sustainable
development in Saskatchewan through innovative uses of equipment that support sustainable livelihoods. The first project, under the direction of the University of Regina, has involved
intra and inter-organizational planning to install a vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) on the
University of Regina Campus for both energy
generation and educational purposes. The
VAWT has now been installed and the university is almost ready with a web-based dashboard to share data from the VAWT for use
in diverse educational settings. The second
initiative is a collaboration of higher education partners of RCE Saskatchewan (including
Luther College, the University of Regina,
and the University of Saskatchewan) with thetown of Craik to enable sharing of productive
capital (such as machines, vehicles and buildings)
within the Craik community. To date, this project has involved identification of specific typesof equipment to be shared, Free/Open Source
Software programs potentially available forenabling this sharing, and specification ofsoftware features to enable equipment to“volunteer” for projects. Underlying this concept of volunteerism is a reconceptualizationof “equipment as citizen” with this new ethical valuation to be supported by the software. In both the wind turbine project andPart II

the sharing productive capital project, educational strategies are being developed centred on the pieces of equipment themselves
while presupposing diverse educational audiences.
RCE Greater Phnom Penh (Cambodia)
Partners of RCE Greater Phnom Penh are engaged in ESD projects to enhance education onfood and agriculture for local schools and to
facilitate improvement of agricultural practices
leading to a reduction of chemical use by farmers. Agriculture and food production are thefoundation of livelihoods for the majority of theCambodian people. The RCE aspires to createmodels of practice-linked education that promote appreciation of organic agriculture andcreate opportunities for productive activities
within schools and on farms.
RCE London (United Kingdom)
RCE London presents a compelling story of facilitating the formation of a network to assist
and shape the legacy of the Olympic Park in
East London. The development aspires toconnect the park and the communities around
it. Being a network of networks, RCE London
provides access to the resources – skills, expertise and power – that would assist in identification and realization of projects that would
mitigate community disconnect from the development and would contribute to regeneration of the area. Working within a dynamic
area of formal and informal education, the RCE
enables people’s participation in shaping theirurban environment in response to London
hosting the Summer Olympics.
RCE KwaZulu Natal (South Africa)
The uMngeni river, the main source of waterin KwaZulu Natal, is heavily polluted by storm
water, toxins from industries, sewage and excess
nutrients from agriculture. Despite negative
quality tests and complaints from the public, little had been achieved over the years. RCE KwaZulu Natal initiated a project where a different
strategy for water monitoring was establishedbased on community participation and learning. Local communities have become engaged
in regular water sample collection, analysiscont.

Part II

education. All of these livelihood activities requiredlearning about and within the local ecological context.
Whereas economic incentives are significant in communities for shifting from unsustainable practices,such interventions have to be conscious of the local
needs and appropriateness of development options.
RCE Greater Phnom Penh (Box 4.5) has adopted sericulture (silk farming) as one of the economic incentive
options to shift from unsustainable, high input farming to organic farming, while maintaining the same
pattern of land use and being aware of food security
issues. Additional examples of RCEs supporting sustainable livelihoods are found in RCE London and
RCE KwaZulu Natal (Box 4.5).

Governance for a Green andSustainably Developed Economy
Redefining boundaries and perspectives

and documentation of water quality leading
not only to a greater understanding of theissues but building relations with the Howick
Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) – a
primary organization dealing with waste waterin the region. While the problem is far frombeing solved, public activism generated by
the project has led to creating a foundation
for further progress and learning.
RCE Rhine-Meuse (northern
continental Europe)
The OPEDUCA (Open Educational Regions)concept of RCE Rhine-Meuse offers encouragement and opportunities for all people– from preschool to higher education andother organizational settings – to work in close
contact with each other. Instead of relying
on fixed curricula and textbooks, pupils,
teachers, scientists and representatives ofother organizations shape learning processes
around themes relevant for the present andthe future. The critical learning processes that
focus on the issues of food, water, building,transport and energy prompt developmentof regional networks of schools, knowledge
institutes, companies and local governments,
training of teachers, empowering schools as
focal knowledge points in their own open
educational region and guiding and informing experts, managers and politicians in taking part in OPEDUCA.

SCP systems as an engine of the green economy
emphasize the need to deal simultaneously withboth production and consumption in relation to overarching sustainability outcomes tied to human wellbeing and ecosystem health. The challenge remains
as to how to develop sustainability habits – a cultureof sustainability – across the value chains of products and services and, ultimately, across society.
Currently, many SCP actions are assigned predominantly to individual sectors or groups along a particular supply chain of producers, distributors andconsumers. As a result, measures for successful
development of the production system in question
often remain with the producers while consumers are simply to be informed
about better consumption options. Such an approach might not only be ineffective for uptake of innovations but may also miss opportunities for stimulating innovations and developments that cut across sectors and act at a systems
level, for example, product service systems such as leasing, sharing, or rentingof products. This approach also tends to assume static boundaries of markets
and the predominant application of market activity in achieving particular livelihood goals (as opposed to potentially incorporating other non-market livelihood
approaches). Often there is only a short-term future orientation related to traditional business cycles and forecasting as opposed to visioning and measurement tied to the long-term time horizons associated with sustainable development.
A long-term focus assists in charting new trajectories for alternative (and complementary) development paths, opening up spaces for creative technological innovation and, equally importantly, the potential for collaboration and risk sharing that
long-term visioning affords.

117

118

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Part IITo support more SCP, a system of education of actors along supply chains would
need to have a strong sustainability dimension related not only to its content but
also to the capabilities needed to engage, partner, innovate, and where possible(or necessary) redefine the entire system. Challenges and innovations for SCP
concern all who are engaged in the direct and indirect support of market andnon-market relationships in the areas of policy, design, management, distribution,
sales and the end-of-life of products. For example, change to a longer-term visioning
horizon would require learning that presupposes a redefining of resources thatemphasize the importance of investments in human and social capital (i.e. individual and public education) and enables a diversity of SCP and other developmental pathways to be explored in relation to sustainable development outcomes. This
allows a questioning and exploration of existing path dependencies against theholistic framework of sustainable development that should, in turn, define what
is meant by success in a green economy. RCEs in different regions offer examples
of innovations that could inspire new and diverse models of production andconsumption that are more inclusive, resilient, and built on the strengths of theircommunities. RCEs have facilitated access of local farmers to a market of local
individual consumers (in RCE Makana) and organizations (in RCE Skåne), an opportunity for the local unemployed to engage in production of sanitation services(in RCE Makana), opportunities for communities to establish a system for sharing
productive capital that, previously, remained underutilized (in RCE Saskatchewan), and engagement in productive environmentally sustainable practices for
those who were previously in conflict with conservation efforts (in RCE Cebu and
RCE Lucknow). To address the challenges of SCP further, it might be importantto recommend provisions where consumers become more closely engaged in thedesign of SCP systems through discussions with producers, policymakers andcivil society organizations.
Ultimately a focus on each individual having a sustainable livelihood encourages
individuals to see themselves simultaneously as producers, distributors and consumers within their own livelihood. This requires the institutional and policy frameworks that enable this integration within one’s own livelihood to take place. It also
requires the material conditions, education and training needed for individuals
and autonomous communities to advance their production possibilities in waysthat promote the viability of existing social institutions and the ecosystems on
which they depend.
ESD communities have demonstrated an ability to open up neutral spaces throughinnovative governance structures that enable positions to be taken that mightotherwise be perceived as too politically sensitive and, therefore, ordinarily notpossible. For example, in response to a call by government authorities for public
feedback on a proposed plan for developing a nuclear power plant in the province of
Saskatchewan, Canada, individual faculty members of higher education partnersof RCE Saskatchewan were able to offer their scholarly and technical expertisefrom a long-term sustainability perspective. Such input would otherwise havebeen too sensitive for any one particular higher education partner organization to
put forward, especially given a very short timeline for public input. In this significant case, the RCE provided a responsive platform for scholars with a commitment to sustainable development to collectively explore and propose alternative
and appropriate courses of energy development.

119

120

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Paving the ways for new learning systems
In terms of governance, RCEs provide a new way of structuring scholarly workthrough participation in multisectoral partnerships dedicated to ESD. These networks transcend (yet involve) traditional academic organizations while preserving
and enhancing academic freedom of individual scholars. This kind of institutionalinnovation in knowledge production and scholarship for sustainable development
may be an essential part of transitioning to sustainable production systems. One
can look historically at other multisectoral scholarly partnerships that have formed outside the traditional academy and emerged at critical moments when existing production systems have been in crisis. These partnerships have generated
new ways of knowing that have underpinned subsequent transitions to new production systems. For example, the Royal Society of London formed in 1662 playeda central role in the rise of scientific inquiry, with this scientific knowledge being
central to the industrial revolution that began in the mid-18th century. Similarly,
an even earlier innovation in scholarship was the creation of Trilingual Collegesin the early 16th century. These colleges taught students proficiency in classical
Latin, Greek and Hebrew, enabling access to (and a better understanding of) ancient texts (including biblical texts) written in these languages. The Trilingual
Colleges (such as the Trilingual College of Leuven in Belgium founded in 1518)
played a central role in the rise of humanism that, in turn, led to broad social improvements and organizational innovations. Understanding the parallels between
these early institutional innovations in scholarship (later formally incorporated
into universities with the creation of departments in the humanities and sciences)points to the kinds of structural innovations needed in scholarship at the present
moment. Interestingly, the global RCE movement shares important parallels withthe earlier development of the Trilingual College of Leuven and the Royal Societyof London (see Chapter 10). These structural parallels coupled with the rapid riseof RCEs since the start of the DESD in 2005 (which, in itself, is institutionallyremarkable given their relatively modest levels of financial support) point to the
RCE network potentially playing an indispensable role in negotiating a transition
to sustainable production systems globally (including the creation of a green economy and socially just society).

Growing from within
Diversity of development options is vital in green growth discussions, as economic
growth not rooted in a societal and cultural context can seldom bring about sustainability. For a large percentage of the global population who live in a subsistence state, livelihood is directly linked to a high dependence on bio-cultural diversity
and ecosystem resources. Community worldviews, reasoning methods, values,
norms, knowledge practices and technologies which are connected to local systems of stewardship in such societies are often marginalized in an aggregate
growth model. Local knowledge practices or grassroots innovations do not getlinked to productive occupations and livelihoods due to changing sociocultural
production processes, lack of legitimacy for informally learned skills, challenges
of intergenerational transfer of such knowledge, mismatch or conflicts with mainstream knowledge systems, lack of access and right to resources, and inadequate
mechanisms for intellectual property rights protection.
Specific local needs and growth aspirations of such communities can be met
through harnessing local resources and existing knowledge, strengthening neces-

Part IIsary skills, and creating a facilitating atmosphere through minimal external inputs.
Various resources such as natural resources (land, ecosystem, climate, biodiversity),
human resources (knowledge and skills, local concepts, ways of learning, teachingand experimenting), produced assets (infrastructure, local technologies), economic institutions (markets, incomes, legitimized ownership, price relations andcredit), social resources (community organizations, social institutions and leadership) and cultural resources (beliefs, norms, values, and lifestyles) can be crucial
in a locally relevant development model while appropriately integrating external
resources (Haverkort, van’t Hooft & Hiemstra, 2003) Such an approach often
gives better control of development options and processes while also retaining
benefits locally that can be sustainable in the long run.
As in the case of RCE Lucknow, facilitation of indigenous communities’ capacities
and assets has generated sustainable livelihood options locally. The RCE’s workwith the Tharu indigenous community whose lifestyle totally depends on the nearby
forest resources for livelihoods, food, fodder, and health, as well as social andreligious ceremonies, has generated a favourable natural resource management
program while fostering a better quality of life in the community. Harnessing
locally available resources to increase soil fertility, promotion of local indigenous
varieties for improving food security, adoption of alternative and proximal renewableenergy options are some of the examples of how growth can be achieved
through an endogenous development approach. Instilling the confidence of a set ofcommunity-level decisionmakers, and reinforcing the notion of shared natural aswell as cultural resources has led to increased autonomy and better self-esteem
within the Tharu community.

In seeking appropriate transitions to a green economy in particular, and a sustainably developed society more generally, one needs to keep in mind advancements inunderstandings of quality of life and well-being since the early emergence of sustainable development discourse. In this case, the idea of poverty has been broadened to go beyond the traditional understanding of poverty as income poverty andis now understood in relation to exposure to adverse risks and a deprivation inwell-being. This makes advancements in the understanding of the concept of wellbeing central to understanding what meaningful and appropriate transitions forsustainable development look like. Well-being is also central to developing appropriate measurements for advancement or progress. Given the contextual natureof human well-being, there is also a need for contextualized measurement of progress (as opposed to only using macro assessments that overlook these important
local dimensions). At the same time, one also needs to implement, at a policy
level, national and international measures of well-being in a way that captures
the breadth of the concept of well-being (for example, various measures of grossnational happiness) and enables consideration of a broad range of social investments and organizational strategies. The implications of well-being in relation
to the marketplace in general, and the green economy in particular, also need tobe thoughtfully considered. For example, one needs to consider how production
and consumption systems currently relate to satisfying basic needs (such as food,shelter and health) along with one’s personal security and capacity to overcome
emergencies. In addition, one can reflect on the role a meaningful and sustainable
livelihood (including one’s livelihood activities in the market) plays in ensuring

Challenges ofTransition to a
Sustainable
Society andGreen Economy

121

122

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

one’s own autonomy and advancing a sense of self or identity. In addition to one’s
capacity for self-actualization, one can also consider the broader contribution ofsustainable livelihoods to collective well-being to the extent they advance a greater
degree of equity, respect for individual and collective rights, and social cohesion.

Learning towards
Sustainable
Development:
Embracing market
and non-market
solutions

In order to discuss what kind of knowledge production is needed for transition toa sustainable society that promotes well-being, one can first review the goals or
outcomes of sustainable development that define what kinds of knowledge production are appropriate. This is doable to the extent sustainable development as aconcept is focused on outcomes. One set of outcomes relates to process. Process
outcomes are focused on how development occurs – whatever development paths
are ultimately chosen. Such outcomes reflect concerns that any process of development respects human dignity and community autonomy along with maintaining
environmental integrity (for example, through sustaining habitats). Such process
outcomes are achieved through politically transparent processes, implementation
and respect for laws governing these processes (for example, support for labour
rights and environmental assessments), along with legal and other avenues forappeal with appropriate remedies. In addition, sustainable development has overarching outcomes tied to its two key goals going back to Our Common Future. This
involves seeking paths of development that reduce and/or eliminate poverty (in its
various forms) and environmental degradation.
Positively phrased, these goals involve pursuing development paths that simultaneously support ongoing improvements in human well-being and quality oflife alongside improvements in ecosystem health and resilience. These overarching goals embody the idea of progress found in the development portion of
the concept. A third set of outcomes involves sustaining various forms of capital– physical/manmade, financial capital, human capital (including capabilities andcompetencies), natural, and social capital. These forms of capital make possible amultiplicity of sustainable development paths. The value of each is assessed in relation to their ability to achieve the overarching sustainable development outcomes.
Sustainable development involves recognizing that a number of these forms ofcapital may not be readily substitutable with each other so that their excess depletion might seriously constrain the choices available to future generations. This
concern of sustainable development for various forms of capital also involves addressing risks associated with each. A goal, then, of sustainable development is to
mitigate exposure to adverse risks associated with each form (whether traditionalrisks in relation to physical and financial capital or questions of vulnerability orlack of resilience for human, social and natural capital). This involves understanding the various hazards to which they each are exposed. At the same timea concern for these capital forms leads to seeking to cultivate conditions likely tominimize or eliminate hazards over the long-term while generating positive opportunities for capital formation. With all these outcomes, learning needs to takeplace. This includes not only an appreciation of what these outcomes might meanin general theoretical terms and at a global scale, but also what they mean in theparticular, highly situated social and ecological contexts in which development
always takes place.
The power of the discourse of sustainable development (and a danger of positioning discussion of green growth outside of this discourse) is that sustainable de-Part IIvelopment does not prejudge what kinds of development are the best solutions (orat least are better solutions) for attaining these sustainability outcomes. Instead,each is evaluated in terms of sustainable development’s (1) process outcomes, (2)capital outcomes, and (3) overarching outcomes (as outlined above). Sustainable
development as an activity can involve strategies employing market solutions (suchas those embodied in the ideas of ecological modernization and green growth) but
also those employing non-market solutions. More especially, sustainable development explores synergies among diverse forms of development or models of production in situated contexts. For example, in the case of human health, enhancing
the voluntary or not-for-profit sector’s capacity to achieve long-term population
health outcomes might, in turn, have very positive synergies with attempts
at quality improvement and patient-centred care by market and state organizations delivering formal health care (for example, in hospital settings). From amarket perspective, a focus on sustainable development outcomes also allows fora constructive evaluation of the need for economic growth in general and whattypes of production of goods and services (that is, what kinds of market growth)should be pursued to most readily achieve sustainable development outcomes inan efficient and effective manner. This can include evaluating what kinds of market
organizations (such as those employing international investment or forms of local
investment) are most appropriate and collaborative opportunities between themin achieving sustainable development outcomes in a given setting. Sustainable
development also seeks to maintain diverse forms of social capital, including
sustaining market organizations (implicit in the green growth agenda) alongsideother organizations (such as the capacities of the non-profit, state, professional,
religious, household and academic sectors).
This social capital focus recognizes the vital contribution of each type of organization to various dimensions of human well-being. Sustaining social capital also
involves sustaining the institutions that undergird these various organizations.
For example, in the case of markets this implies a respect for property rights andself-ownership; in the case of countries, respect for the rule of law and the powersof citizenship. In this regard, global social capital formation and institutional development around a new personal identity, specifically the view that every person
ought to have a sustainable livelihood, becomes an imperative. Sustainable livelihoods achieve the overarching outcomes of improving human well-being andecosystem health. A sustainable livelihood is also one that ensures an individual
effectively manages risk, while advancing his or her development of (and accessto) a diverse capital base from which to strategically construct a livelihood.

A further form of social capital formation that increasingly seems essential forsustainable development is the creation of new organizational forms capable ofthe kind of innovation and knowledge production needed to transition to a sustainable society and that has sustainable livelihood generation at its heart. Such structures must generate research and innovation for particular contexts that create
production possibilities (both market and non-market) aimed at the outcomes ofsustainable development. RCEs are one example. As learning entities, their focus
on research into education ensures their innovations build human and social capitalwhile, as a corollary, creating conditions for innovation in other forms of capital(such as sustainable equipment and building design). Because sustainable development focuses on outcomes, it is not prescriptive as to what specific develop-

Organizational
Innovation for
New Formsof Knowledge
Production

123

124

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

ment paths ought to be pursued but, instead, is open to a wide range of paths. Thisis analogous to the marketplace, for example, where the goal or desired outcome of
an investor in a market, namely a profitable return, does not determine the natureof the investment to be made in terms of the manufacture and sale of specificgoods and services. While the openness of sustainable development to a diversityof development paths is one of its key conceptual strengths, it also provides challenges as it is not obvious what types of innovation are needed to achieve theseoutcomes. This is further complicated by the challenge of trying to achieve simultaneously these multiple outcomes within specific social and ecological contexts.
Given the number of unknowns implicit in assessing how this knowledge might
be produced, it is worthwhile to examine the results of the global RCE initiative
begun in 2005 among nearly 130 RCEs now acknowledged around the world.

Characteristics
of RCE Innovationfor Sustainable
Development

In describing the strengths and distinctiveness of the knowledge generated by
RCEs, one element that is perhaps not surprising (given the participation ofhigher education organizations in RCEs) is that knowledge is freely pursued by
RCEs. This mirrors one of the basic assumptions of universities, namely academic
freedom reflected in investigator-driven or curiosity-driven research. Yet there
may be deeper structural reasons for this freedom as well, to the extent RCEs
are self-organized and mobilize resources from their members on a voluntarybasis. Such mobilization presupposes a freedom of choice on the part of each
RCE participant. The view that RCE partners require partnerships in order toachieve their desired research ends tied to sustainable development also implies the need for flexible
Box 4.6
collaboration among participants (with no one
Critical Characteristics ofpartner asserting a single agenda without conLearning within RCEs
sidering those of others). The need for RCEs to mobilize further participation is likely to also require• Research problems and methods emera respect for the interests of existing and potential
ge from local problems in communities;
participants. While knowledge is freely pursued, it
these, in turn, drive regional sustainability
is also constrained in a number of ways. The nature
innovationsof the research and learning goals of RCEs, namely• Respecting and including different kinds
education for sustainable development, presupposesof knowledge, including indigenous waysthat it is inherently transformative. It possesses someof knowing
critical characteristics (Box 4.6) that make it always• Encouraging transdisciplinary and holistic
locally relevant, applicable to life and meaningfulresearch
to communities. The transformative effectiveness• Advancing research into models of actionof knowledge is enhanced or, in some cases might
research and related methodologies,
presuppose, participation by communities involved
including participatory action researchat the formative stages of the learning process. As
that includes marginalized groups
such, communities themselves help shape the actual• Learning that promotes democracy andscholarly process with traditional researchers acting
equityas participants alongside these. Such an approach en• Learning across generations – from earlycourages the mobilization and integration of research
to advanced age and building researchresources from communities of learners that includes
aptitude at all ages
(but is not limited to) scientific knowledge of research• Focusing on inclusive, transdisciplinary
partners.
themes to encourage broad multistakeholder participation

Part II

A number of ethical dimensions were noted by RCEs regarding how their researchis conducted that would supplement the process outcomes of sustainable development identified earlier. RCEs noted the need to do research on how to engage
communities to make effective transformation for sustainable development. Thisrequired research for capacity-building where key capacities included leadership,
bridging boundaries and interfacing, problem-solving and facilitating solutions.
In addition, to the extent research depended on community contributions, RCEs
identified a need for acknowledgement and appreciation of sources of knowledge
and other contributions made by the community. RCEs also cited concerns reflected in the long-term time horizons associated with sustainable development.
Those involved in RCEs expressed a need for a long-term commitment to communities within their respective RCE regions. This long-term commitment was, inturn, connected with building trust. In terms of the knowledge and other research
outputs of RCEs there was a concern that this knowledge be respectful of ethicalboundaries. Applied knowledge had to be linked to appropriate innovation for theparticular community.
A further ethical duty for RCEs that, in turn, builds further community capacity, isthe responsibility to disseminate knowledge. RCEs develop programs to immediately transfer knowledge to communities, in particular, promotion of RCE research
directly to its stakeholders.

RCEs as a governance system are well positioned to advance green growth andsustainable development. Central to this role are the range of communication strategies available to RCEs. The effective and efficient employment of such strategies
requires the development of communication models for RCEs (for example, forwebsites and newsletters). These communication strategies, especially those forpublic (informal) education, can include major companies and cultural industries.
In turn an RCE can assist its partners in tracking community engagement andaffirming it. In terms of intellectual property issues associated with collaborative
RCE research, RCEs noted the value of open access journals and other media
along with the value of RCEs and UNU adopting open access policies enabling
broad access to the research results of RCEs. RCEs as an innovative governancemodel involving higher education organizations enables effective and efficient mobilization of scholarship for green growth and sustainable development. RCEs caneffectively enhance the capacities of higher education organizations and provide
positive implications for traditional scholarship and research. RCEs enable strategically linking universities in RCE research processes (as already described)
along with feedback of research results back to academic communities. Higher
education organizations can make use of existing collaborative partnerships of
RCEs, both regionally and globally. These partnerships can assist higher educationin making use of local resources and traditional technology in advancing research.
RCEs assist in deliberately including particular groups within and outside higher
education in advancing sustainable development. This includes deliberate inclusionof traditionally overlooked disciplines (for example, social work and the humanities) and groups (for example, indigenous peoples, community services groups,
faith organizations, entrepreneurs/chambers of commerce, SME associations, cooperatives and labour organizations). RCEs also become an important platform
for university research into education for specific transformative technologies.

Concluding
Remarks: RCEcontributions tosustainability
governance

125

126

Chapter 4 Learning and Innovation for Greener and Socially Just Societies

Networks between RCEs can readily be established to discuss methodologies andcapacity-building of researchers. This inter-RCE collaboration can help build apractical awareness of transdisciplinarity among researchers, develop case studies
of effective RCE research approaches, and create modules on how to do research
useful for diverse settings appropriate to the research context. These new modelsof research can, in turn, be shared back with the participating universities,
colleges and technical institutes.
While this overview of the learning facilitated by RCEs is not exhaustive, it does
provide an important snapshot of key principles and strategies practically being
employed by RCEs in advancing ESD. RCEs, due to their structure, have capacities
that help synergistically advance many of these strategies. They also illustrate specific ways of conducting research that, when employed, are likely to simultaneously
advance the multiple sustainable development outcomes previously discussed.
The process outcomes of sustainable development are reflected in the need forresearch conducted in a way that respects the dignity of individuals and their communities in the research process, and develops research outputs appropriate to theeconomic, social, cultural, and environmental needs of communities. Sustainable
development outcomes associated with sustaining various forms of capital (including both assets and capabilities) are also advanced. RCEs recognize and build research strategies tied to vital contributions communities are able to provide in defining research problems, identifying appropriate methodologies, and implementing knowledge for sustainable development. RCEs, in turn, enhance this humanand social capital formation. RCEs also help share the in-kind and financial costsof sustainability research aimed at the long-term among RCE partners – research
that, in itself, is inherently risky due to many unknown parameters. Much of thework of RCEs focuses on building the capacities of diverse RCE partners and individual citizens to develop and implement new knowledge for sustainability. Local
projects, in turn, once implemented will build appropriate human, social, natural, physical and financial capital over time. Finally, the overarching outcomesof sustainable development (advancing progress related to human well-being andecosystem health) are also advanced. Deficiencies with respect to each overarchinggoal (whether human poverty and vulnerability or instances of ecological degradation) are tapped into at local and regional levels as a source for developing research
problems to be addressed. Cross-cutting themes and educational issues associatedwith these diverse sets of regional problems also then readily emerge. To the extent the new forms of grounded scholarship for sustainable development enabledby RCEs is intellectually, emotionally and spiritually a part of what makes life
worth living, these too become key components of human well-being and integral
to the promotion of sustainable livelihoods.

References
Haverkort, B., van’t Hooft, K. & Hiemstra, W. (Eds.) (2003). Ancient roots new
shoots. Leusden, ETC/Compas and Zed Books

Part II

127

128

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Part II

Chapter 5

ESD and the Framingof Transformative Social
Learning in RCEs
Rob O’Donoghue

The DESD has been latterly characterized by competence frameworks for ESD
as a process of transformative social learning. This chapter examines theseframeworks in relation to RCEs, exploring how perspectives of communication,individual competence and change practices have come to be inscribedas competences. These framings have a compelling clarity for the mediation
and assessment of ESD but are surprisingly opaque to the diverse ways inwhich learning and social innovation play out in the RCEs.
The narrative draws on a recent oeuvre in systems thinking as well as onsociocultural perspectives on learning. This takes us beyond the compellingframings of competence approaches to more open-ended framings and intosome of the sociocultural refinements of situated, reflexive learning. Some caseexamples from RCEs are briefly examined and a concluding attempt is madeto scope some of the contours of social learning as a landscape of reflexive
processes that appear to be bringing more coherence and momentum in African
RCE contexts of co-engaged learning-to-change.

129

130

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Introduction

This paper examines some of the approaches to framing social change within the
DESD. It gives particular attention to the emergence of RCEs as co-engaged structures for enabling transformative social learning.
Wals et al. (2009) scope transformative social learning as open processes thatexemplify personal and community processes of change as found in the coengaged processes of learning in an RCE. He also points to other dimensions wherepractical, intellectual and political engagement might give shape to processes ofsocial re-orientation through education that opens up new insights both for andthrough social innovation. This rich picture of social learning and change reflects
a transformative stance that resonates with the sociocultural tradition after Lev
Vygotsky. Stetsenko (2008) expands this to contemplate a collaborative purposefultransformation of the world. This aligns well with RCEs and with her argumentthat “communities belong together and co-evolve with all other communities on
the global scale, sharing one common fate and history” (Stetsenko, 2008, p.490).
As ESD and RCEs have emerged, transformative perspectives such as these havedeveloped to drive imperatives towards sustainable development through active
global citizenship for sustainability, an emerging focus in global change discourses
and in emerging RCE “citizen science” social movements, such as the water
quality monitoring system in South Africa (miniSASS) (Taylor, Msoli & Taylor,2013). Here the RCE notion is that sustainability can be achieved through awidening deliberative process of community-engaged transformative learning andactivism for change. The ideals of active global citizenship for sustainability areat the heart of RCE approaches to learning and sustainable development and arereflected in community-engaged change practices as well as in the recent framing ofcompetence for enacting and assessing ESD.

Conceptualizing
ESD Competences

The discursive mix in relation to RCEs is diverse, encompassing both imperatives
for change through reasoned practice and practical reason through the exploration
to find new ways of doing things in response to a world where there is increasing
evidence of human-induced change on a widening scale that extends to global
bio-regional habitats and the climatic patterns that sustain life. Figure 5.1 is anattempt to summarize some of the diverse practices and processes that are foundin RCE approaches to transformative social learning. The approaches comprise diverse perspectives on communication including the axes of concern in individualcompetence as well as community learning and social innovation. Here the scopeof activities includes RCE activities where participants might take action to try out
new ideas or simply meet to discuss new ideas that are circulating in the media.
This diversity is found across the emergent field of social learning (Wals, 2011).
For the purpose of this scoping review of transformative social learning in RCEs,
let us give attention to the perspectives on ESD and how these contour the process through the inscription of sustainable development competences. We shallthen bring these inscriptions into question and explore perspectives on systems
thinking and transformative social learning, which are an important missing dimension. Here we shall first examine the systemic contours of new environmental knowledge and draw on the work of Wiek, Withycombe & Redman (2011) todevelop a perspective beyond the early competence inscriptions of the UNECEPart II

ESD: What is in the mix for mediatingtransformative learning in RCEs?

Reasoned Practice• Get the message across (target groups)• Advocacy, buy-in and networked learning• E-learning (wiki and massive open online courses)

Individual Competence• Empowerment (valued beings, knowing and doings)• Agency (anticipatory competence and strategic thinking)• Practical competences (problem solving and action-taking)Community Learning and Social Innovation

Practical Reason

Communication• Capability approach (transfer factors and expansive learning)• Community of practice (practice architecture)• Complex constellations of risk (systems thinking)

Figure 5.1 The Emerging Contours of Transformative Learning(2011). We shall then probe some examples of transformative social learning thatare emerging in small-scale social innovation work within RCEs. Finally, these examples are used to scope the contours of co-engaged learning-to-change as theseare emerging in some of the social learning practices in African RCE contexts
examined (O’Donoghue, Shava & Zazu, 2013).

According to Wals (2010) narratives on learning reflect an expansive terrain thatreaches from local to regional and global, seeking to integrate social, economic,
ecological/environmental as well as ethical concerns around a concern for humanrelations and stewardship of the other than human. Here three lenses on knowledge
are emerging, notably, an integrative holism, a critical perspective on change overtime and engagement in responsive transformative action. These are reflected ascompetences in the learning to know dimension in the UNECE (2011) specification of ESD competences. Here, being competent has been inscribed as competencies in:• Learning to know,• Learning to do,• Learning to be, and• Learning to live together (See Figure 5.2).
Assertions such as these produce the illusion that transformative learning can be inscriptively mapped as human capabilities, as well as choreographed and accounted
for as a rational process where all of the elements are learner-led.

An Emerging
Terrain ofCompetence
Inscription

131

132

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Integrative, Critical Envisioning and Transformative
dimensions in ESD Competences
HOLISTIC APPROACH
a. Integrative thinking
b. Inclusivity
c. Dealing with complexities+

ENVISIONING CHANGE
a. Learning from the pastb. Inspiring engagement in thepresent
c. Exploring alternative futures

HOLISTIC APPROACH
Integrative thinking and practice• Listed competences
ENVISIONING CHANGE
Past, present and future• Listed competences+

ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATION
a. What it means to be an educatorb. Approaches to teaching andlearningc. The education system as a whole

HOLISTIC APPROACH
Integrative thinking and practice• Listed competences

Learning
to know
The educator
understands …

Learning
to do
The educatoris able to …

ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATION
People, pedagogy andeducation system• Listed competences

ENVISIONING CHANGE
Past, present and future• Listed competences
ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATION
People, pedagogy andeducation system• Listed competences

Competences foreducators in ESDHOLISTIC APPROACH
Integrative thinking and practice• Listed competences

HOLISTIC APPROACH
Integrative thinking and practice

ENVISIONING CHANGE
Past, present and future• Listed competences
ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATION
People, pedagogy andeducation system• Listed competences

Learning tolive together
The educator
works with others
in ways that …

Learning
to be
The educator
is someone
who …

ENVISIONING CHANGE
Past, present and future• Listed competences
ACHIEVING TRANSFORMATION
People, pedagogy andeducation system• Listed competences

Figure 5.2 A Competence Framing of ESD Highlighting the Three
Common Dimensions in Learning to Know (UNECE, 2011)

Each arena of competence idealizes holistic integration and the envisaging of change
by individuals and groups who come to achieve the transformation that their developing competence makes possible. What is not evident here is a coherent theoryof change that holds these propositions together to inform social learning that istransformative. Compelling as such ideal frameworks are for charting transformation, and beyond their application in assessment and evaluation, they can be
relatively empty checklists that are not easily related to RCE contexts.
RCEs emerged as situated collaborations engaging the sustainability and socialtransformation challenges related, among other significant issues, to the biodiversity and climate challenges in the immediate and more distant future. The con-Part IItexts and ways of doing things are very diverse, so a key challenge has been how to
support local learning initiatives while tracking and enhancing the effectivenessof the learning and change initiatives. Situated perspectives on transformative
learning that are better informed by knowledge and practice are necessary.

The 20th century was characterized by continued proliferation of disciplinary
knowledge and the emergence of widening knowledge fields. Notable here is how
ecology developed from a fieldwork methodology in the 1920s when Jan Smuts
first coined the term “holism”(1926) to refer to a wider system of integration thatlaid the foundations for systems theories which one now finds in the earth andeconomic systems sciences. Popkewitz (2008, p. 27) describes how the interplay ofknowledge and risk in the modern cosmopolitan era is characterized by systemic
and problem-oriented knowledge production with flows of universals (generalized
propositions) and salvation narratives for mediating social life (e.g. ESD approaches
to learning-for-change). The framing of ESD as competences is a form of individualizing technical specification that is compelling to the bureaucratic mind but canbear little relation to the situated, sociocultural learning processes that produce
these capabilities. The individualizing relational semantics here have the appearances of being directly related to competences for learning and change, but theframings commonly lack reference to a socio-historical context or the systemic
knowledge necessary to grasp the complexities in/of the world and what is involvedin learning to work together to bring about change.

ESD in aChanging
Knowledge
Environment

In attempting to resolve some of the limitations in much of the early specification Systems Thinkingof competence by categories (checklists), Wiek et al. (2011) propose a layering where in Situated Social
basic competences like communication and critical thinking might underpin key Learningcompetencies in sustainability. Here the interplay between systems thinking, anticipatory, normative and strategic competencies and interpersonal competence areread as processes enabling learning and change. In line with the underlying systems perspective here, Forrester (2009, p.5) notes how “Many principles form thefoundation of system dynamics and become a basis for thinking in all endeavors”.
Figure 5.3 is an attempt to contemplate systems thinking and a developmental progression for social learning in a complex problem constellation within the socialhistorical context of an RCE. The bottom half of the diagram, after Wiek et al.
(2011), poses how systems thinking enables the anticipatory and normative thoughtfor strategic intervention in the company of others (interpersonal competence).
This goes some way towards mitigating many of the limitations in earlier competence framings as it is often the grasp of system dynamics that allows a clearer
anticipation of problems and normative adjustments, reflexive processes that
require strategic competence along with the competences of being able to work
effectively with others. The Wiek et al. (2011) systems oeuvre is useful to informa start-up and systemic modelling for the acquisition and grasp of knowledge
related to risk to enable the scaffolding of open-learning pathways that are learnerled.
The systems-thinking schematic is a simplified process model noted in many of
the small-scale social interventions in the context of social innovations by African

133

134

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Systems Thinking in Social Learning

Bring In
(Anticipatory& Normative)

SocialLearning
Start-up(Systemthinking)

Bring Out
(Anticipatory& Normative)

Bring Together(Normative, Strategic& Interpersonal)

Bring About(Strategic& Interpersonal)

Social learning and with competence development?
Individual competence
Systems thinking
Complex problem constellationin the situation and history

Interpersonal

Non-intervention futures
Intervention point

Strategic
Socio-cultural practice

Anticipatory (A)Change strategies

Sustainability visions

Normative (N)(Adapted from Wiek et al. 2011)

Figure 5.3 Systems Thinking as a Foundation for Social Learning

RCEs (O’Donoghue et al., 2013). Here start-up commonly reflected systems
thinking in relation to historical social processes and ecosystems or indigenous
knowledge systems that enabled anticipatory insights and a normative reframingof sustainability. Within learning processes such as these, participants sharedstoriesand insights or proposed perspectives (bring-out processes) based on theirexperiences and understandings around what is now known (bring-in processes).
Intermeshed within these processes was an emergence of strategic possibilities
that were supported by others as learned insights deliberated within emerging
evidence and creative re-imaginings. For example, an innovation related to insulated cooking bags (hot bags) brought insights where the process was related
to “heating with flames and cooking with coals”, a process that was then taken
into re-imaging cooking on a stove and with a hot bag in a way that had been

Part II

known (wood selection) and practised by indigenous women for many generations (O’Donoghue et al., 2013, p. 41).
The competences turn in education provides a competing but incomplete frame ofreference for approaching transformative learning in RCEs because competenceacquisition does not always translate into a capability of deploying the competence to enact ideas and change practices in a given context1. Wiek et al. (2011) solve
this problem, in part, with a systemic thinking proposition and by inserting interpersonal competence as a centrepiece, but this does not take adequate account ofsociocultural mediation or variability in social innovation as ESD responses withincomplex constellations of risk.

It is currently fairly common for ESD to be centred on problems related to biodiversity and climate change, often without directly relating these to either thecontext or to how these relate to the local contours of risk. Participants can thus beconfronted with problems without a sense of how the practices producing risk areeither evident in their context or how these might be addressed by giving closer
attention to how particular patterns of practice contribute to a given problem. A
simple schematic (Figure 5.4) has been helpful in making some of the systemic
connections more explicit in positive ways. In small-scale RCE processes of social
learning we have put constellations of systems and history at the centre of a heuristic
device for situated systems modelling and social innovation in relation to water,energy, health, agriculture, biodiversity and waste. Figure 5.4 reflects how ESD processes of social learning and innovation can probe systems of resource use (handprints – what people can practically do), contemplate the restoration of ecosystemservices (ecosystem) and explore the prospect of systemic changes to mitigate
climate change (footprint – a measurement of the impact of using fossil fuels).
As we worked within these focus areas together, diverse modes of systems thinking came into use and each of these came to be seen in the context of the historicalcapital and patterns of change evident in the complex social-ecological history thathas given rise to diverse patterns of risk. This situating of RCEs as co-engaged responses within complex constellations of risk constitutes the emergent responses
as a purposeful collaboration in the transformation of the world through co-engagedsocial learning. Typologies of individual competence, although providing an initial
opening, have little relevance without the framing of progressions of reflexive intervention that one begins to find in the Wiek et al. (2011) oeuvre. A more openended and sociocultural framing of co-engaged reflexive practices might enable
an emergent grasp of the situated ethical drivers of transformation. The four caseexamples that follow briefly reflect an emerging competence and some patternsof systems thinking that are giving rise to an anticipatory perspective that enables
a shared grasp of and response to a “wicked problem” in diverse ways that are noteasily inscribed or modelled at this early stage of reflexive social learning directed
at purposeful social transformation.

1 De Haan (2010) tried to get around this problem with the integrative notion of Gestaltungskompetenz (the specific capacity to act and solve problems). This was ascribed to 12 sub-competences(key competences) but lacks integrative coherence and a depth perspective (theory) on learning andchange.

Framing Change
in Complex
Constellationsof Risk135

136

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Evaluating Sustainable Livelihood Practices
and Interventions (Access and equity with better consumption
and stewardship practices)

Reduceresource
use

Waste

Biodiversity

Water

Constellationof systems
and history

Agriculture

Restorehabitats &ecosystem services

EnergyHealthMitigatechangeEnhancequality of life

Figure 5.4 An Open Heuristic for Situated Environmental Learning

Cases of Coengaged Learningto-Change

An expansion in the framing of ESD to include systems thinking and sociocultural
diversity has added perspective on the kinds of knowledge and systemic perspectives that are enabling a grasp of the situated complexities of environmental challenges and the associated risk in RCE contexts. A shift in the framing of ESD toa concern for intergenerational heritage and systems thinking is opening a more
complex and situated terrain for reflexive social learning as noted in the exampleof transformative social learning associated with the use of hot bags (see above).
What follows is a series of brief snapshots of some other emerging contexts andprocesses of co-engaged social learning in some African RCEs.

Part II

1. Video on indigenous systems of practiceMany African contexts are characterized by colonizing appropriations and an oppressive marginalization of indigenous knowledge practices that have beenfurther eroded in the modern era. Heritage practices
have emerged as a dialectic foil to enable RCE participants to develop “histories of the present” thatenable a critical grasp of many emergent problems.
Short YouTube videos of heritage practices are used
for start-up work so that learners can explore theirheritage in mother tongue deliberations as indigenous knowledge systems to inform reflexive learning in response to the risk in and of the modern day.
These forms of knowledge sharing are both exploratory fun and an effective way of uncovering emergent
systems of change and much of the depth of practicaland ecological wisdom in African heritage practices.
Today, heritage practices are often reflected as Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS). This introduces
systems modelling and systems thinking, enabling
the anticipation of how modern practices are producing risk. The emerging competence and social innovations here are open and diverse, reflecting bothan emerging agency and health-producing freedoms
that are enabling co-engaged learners to detour someof the risk in everyday life.

2. System modelling towards betterchange choice practices
RCE Makana established a Sustainability Commons(social learning commons space) that is part of a network of commons projects supported by the Wildlife
and Environment Society of South Africa. Here working exhibits and photo narratives are provided as a
useful starting point for a change-choice-practice
approach to social innovation. The emphasis is onlearning by doing and re-imagining social innovations that reduce impact and are better aligned tonatural systems while meeting social needs. Picture
narrative and practice approaches shift the concern
for awareness creation to the production of situatedcompetence with the capability to produce change incontext. The reflexive social processes here are centred on the practical exploration of alternative technologies where, once again, systems thinking can produce the necessary anticipatory reflection to fostersocial innovation.

3. Modelling the practice and narrative contoursof learning-to-change
Through research on rural community learning (Phiri,
2012; Rivers, 2014), materials to enable water conservation and food production were developed andpilot tested. A training manual was then developed
through a course to train community facilitators so
as to enable co-engaged learning to conserve waterand produce food locally. A review of the curriculum of agricultural colleges is being undertaken anda co-engaged project to improve support for smallscale agriculture and extension is being developed.
Here the situated narrative is an emerging cycle ofsocial transformation that is not easily realized ina struggle for emergent freedoms within the contingency of a post-apartheid sociocultural context inSouth Africa. Here situated and emergent practicepoints to contours of learning and change that transcend the tools provided by both the early competence
mappings and the systems thinking expansion thatbrought more coherence to curriculum planning.

4. Citizen science and social innovation
The Orange Senqu River Basin Project (ORASECOM)
developed miniSASS as a citizen science process forassessing river health. Civic groups and school scienceteachers are being equipped and trained to monitor
the health of local rivers. Results are uploaded onto
a national database where findings and ideas canbe exchanged and problems and actions deliberated
upon to improve river health. This project is currently being evaluated using an appreciative enquiry
approach to assess value enhancement and impact.
The collaborative and practical site-based work ofknowledge production in relation to water quality in rivers can be seen against the data generated
by others and these interactions are the foundation
for deliberative engagement to reduce risk and restore
the natural systems and processes for river health.
Here, once again, is a relatively open arena of coengagement producing agency with the prospect ofassociated knowledge and action producing freedom
from the risks associated with pollution and the degradation of community water sources.

137

138

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

Towards anOpen Framework
for Contemplating
Social Innovation

The critical processes of co-engaged learning across everyday experiences (A), heritage
practices (B) and what is now known (C) are reflected in Figure 5.5.In these processes
heritage practices and knowledge (B) involve engagement with emergent risk andindigenous practices. Here praxis is required over text, shaping learning interactions where typologies of memory specify the place, along with related histories
and subjectivities. The constellations of situated memory and activity can enable
participants to contemplate both absences (often experienced as loss) and continuities, alongside possibilities that can be identified in relation to the conditions of
the present (A) and what is known today (C). These critical processes of knowledge
construction in learning-to-change must remain open and contested because,in all of the examples examined above, it is not possible to identify or stipulate
a conclusive mediating process informing learning interactions or aligned withspecific competences.
Put simply for illustrative purposes, in many cases heritage knowledge practices(B) usefully bring modern knowledge (A) and experienced patterns of practice inrelation to what is known today (C) into critical relief. In a similar way, these perspectives can also resonate with, inform and enhance the modern practices of theday. In most, there is also a mutual resonance (valourization) across heritage (B)and what is known and experienced today (A and C). The context of everyday life
experience (A) most often holds sway and can serve to open up a range of ideas forpractical exploration around what is known (B and C). The knowledge practices
landscape here thus remains open for critical co-engagement towards taking up
the challenge of learning-to-change in order to make things better for people inand the environments themselves.
In complex constellations of risk, learning processes and learning pathways are
open-ended but some of the enabling constituents to inform ESD processes oflearning-to-change are beginning to be identified. These processes also clearlybuild competence that can enhance adaptive capability but the framing of ESD
as specified categories of competence or as a network of competences does notshed any light on how learning and change might happen or how to support this.
It is, however, notable that co-engagement in RCE contexts can be enhanced withsystems thinking for enabling a reflexive grasp of matters, along with a capacity
to anticipate how things are, how they came to be as they are and what might bedone together to make things better.

Conclusion

This chapter is an attempt to probe some of the anomalies and constraints in early
efforts to contemplate and mediate ESD using competence frameworks. First, theseforeground individual competence and typify specified categories of performativity
that can have a tenuous relation to the complex sociocultural and materials
contexts of learning-to-change in an RCE context. Secondly, the sociocultural context may not allow a person who might claim and typify certain competences toexercise this capability in the social context. Here, for example, something may
simply not be permitted or the necessary resources might not be available. Work
with competence frameworks need to specify how the stipulated categories relate
in environmental learning, as partially achieved in the work of Wiek et al. (2011),
or be complemented by more open-ended framings of work on the complexities

Part IIA Capabilities Approach to Social Innovation(Personal, social and environmental conversion factors)

Heritage practices

Modern expert culture(What was done andknown in the past)(What is known about things)

LookingacrossB

Heritage practices
and knowledge

Learning & Social
Innovation

Bring out

Societal explanatory
knowledge

Bring about

LookingbackComplex constellation

C

A

Livelihood contextsof valued doing,knowing andbeing

Bring inLookingbackof social-ecological risk

Bring together

Figure 5.5 The Social Processes Landscapeof Situated Social Learning in an RCEof context and perhaps the translation factors necessary for active learning to haverelevance in that context.
The chapter charts some of the innovative developments that have value but
notes that stipulated competence conventions for curriculum planning still fallshort when contemplating the sociocultural dimensions of learning and change
in RCE contexts of co-engaged learning and social innovation. Against the limitations explored in relation to the widening conceptual schemas examined (deHaan, 2010; UNECE, 2011; Wiek et al., 2011), it is important to note that in an
RCE context of reflexive engagement, the coherence of the labelling framework isoften far less important than what is actually done on the ground in the complex
realities of the sociocultural setting (Stetsenko, 2008). In line with this assertion,

139

140

Chapter 5 ESD and the Framing of Transformative Social Learning in RCEs

the review has noted that when RCE processes of ESD are well situated and challenging, transformative social learning can emerge. Learning in RCEs can thus reflectcollaborative, purposeful transformation that must transcend inscribed competencesand emergent systems thinking frameworks for co-engaged human endeavour toreflexively produce freedoms that enhance sustainability and reduce risk. Heresustainability and sustainable development can mean so many competing things.
This complexity often has the major advantage of forcing people to deliberate theambiguities and give their own meaning in the mediating of the uncertainties andcomplexities that confront them. It can only be concluded that there is still a lot tobe learned and much to be gained through co-engaged learning in RCE contexts
of struggle towards more just and sustainable world orders.

Referencesde Haan, G. (2010). The development of ESDrelated competencies in supportive institutionalframeworks. International Review of Education,56,
315-328.

Stetsenko, A. (2008). From relational ontology totransformative activist stance on development andlearning: Expanding Vygotsky’s (CHAT) project.
Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3 (2), 471-491.

Forrester, J. W. (2009) Some basic concepts in system
dynamics. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Taylor, J., Msomi, L. & Taylor, L. (2013). Shiyabazali
settlement: Water quality monitoring and community involvement. In Z. Fadeeva, U. Payyappallimana,& R. Petry (Eds.) Innovation in local and global learning systems for sustainability (pp. 92-95). Yokohama,Japan: UNU-IAS.

O’Donoghue, R., Shava, S. & Zazu, C. (2013).
African heritage knowledge in the context of social
innovation.UNU-IAS. Free e-book upload, retrieved
July 2, 2011 from http://www.ias.unu.edu/resource_
centre/UNU_Booklet_MB2013_FINAL_Links_v12.
pdf.
Phiri, C. (2012). Participation and social learning incommunities of practice in natural resource management. Unpublished Masters thesis. Rhodes
University. Grahamstown, South Africa.
Popkewitz, T. (2008). Cosmopolitanism and the age ofschool reform: Science, education, and making society
by making the child. London and New York:
Routledge.
Rivers, N. (2014). Summary report on methodology
used to construct value-creation stories. Project Report.
Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes
University. Grahamstown, South Africa.
Smuts, J. (1926). Holism and evolution. London:
McMillan.

UNECE. (2011). Learning for the future: Competencies
in education for sustainable development. Geneva:
UNECE.
Wals, A.E.J., van der Hoeven, N. & Blanken, H.
(2009). The acoustics of social learning: Designinglearning processes that contribute to a more sustainable
world. Wageningen/Utrecht: Wageningen Academic
Publishers/SenterNovem.
Wals, A.E.J. (2010). Mirroring, Gestaltswitching andtransformative social learning: Stepping stones fordeveloping sustainability competence. International
Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 11 (4),380-390.
Wals, A.E.J. (2011). Learning our way to sustainability. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development,
5 (2), 177-186.
Wiek, A., Withycombe, L. & Redman, C. L. (2011).
Key competencies in sustainability: A reference
framework for academic program development.
Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science,
6, 203-218.

Part II

141

142

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		Part II

Chapter 6

Influencing Development and
Implementation of SD and ESD
Policies, Programs and Projects:
Role of RCEs

Mario Tabucanon

The work of many RCEs is aimed at not only delivering ESD in local communities but also, and very importantly, at influencing policymakers and leadersin their decisionmaking processes towards developing policies, programs andprojects on ESD and SD. The 7th Global RCE Conference in Tongyeong, witha Policymakers’ Roundtable, was historic in that it commenced distinctive discussions on the linking of RCE activities with policy processes and the actors
behind them, which then contributed to the development of the Tongyeong
Declaration on RCEs and ESD.
The Tongyeong Conference brought forth, through the voices of policymakers,
an acknowledgement of work that is already going on, and more appreciation
for this kind of work was highlighted by policymakers at the 8th Global RCE
Conference in Nairobi (Box 6.1).

143

144

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs

		

What emerged from policymakers’ discussions was the reality that there are indeed distinct models of engagement with policymakers whereby RCEs could contribute towards shaping ESD practices. Such engagements – viewed from theinternational, national, subnational (regional), local and organizational vantage
points of influence (See Box 6.1) – can be appropriately emulated in regions acrossthe world to facilitate RCE work with policy stakeholders in shaping ESD policies
that enhance transformative learning and effectuate behavioural change. RCEs
may be involved at various stages of the policy process, from engaging in policymaking itself to policy implementation. In the policy cycle, RCEs may provide
support in terms of policy dialogue, policy research, consultative technical opinions
and advice on policy options, and policy documentations, among other possibilities.
The following sections reflect the trends of engagement, highlight relevant examples reported by members of the global RCE community and provide someinsights expressed by concerned policymakers. The presentations are structured
according to levels of influence, trends, issues, andstages in the policymaking and implementation proBox 6.1
cesses where engagement may take place.
ESD and Engagement with Policy
At UNESCO, it has been found helpful to distinguish two thrusts: the integration of ESD
issues and skills into relevant education policies (SD to E) and policies relevant to sustainable development (E to SD). There is aneed to also be clear about different levels ofpolicies: (1) Global level, which UNESCO andother UN agencies promote; (2) Regional,
for example, Africa, Asia-Pacific, Americas,
Europe; (3) National; (4) Subnational, where
education may be decentralized; and (5) Local
and city government level (UNU-IAS, 2014).

Influence at the International Level
At the international level, engagement of the RCE community with policymakers is done through collaborations with international and intergovernmental organizations and networks via international sustainability processes. For RCEs, joint initiatives with UN
agencies, regional bodies (multicountry) and international/continental ESD networks and organizations
provide opportunities for policy influence in countries.

The RCE community participates in ESD-related processes associated with the DESD providing inputs to
ESD policy discussions and facilitating incorporationof ESD principles in various development frameworks.
In the case of global policies it would be helpful to havea continuation of and reference to the DESD thrusts.
A mid-Decade review of the DESD revealed that having
a global framework helped mobilize national level
activities (UNU-IAS, 2014). The international reference
is important because governments that had signed up
to the global framework had some obligations and commitments to it. The RCEs
are expected to translate global ESD policies into regional and local actions, and as
global policies are underpinned by national government support and agreements,
these local actions could logically, in turn, lead to influencing national policies.

At the 8th Global RCE Conference in Nairobi,
the Policymakers’ Roundtable drew attention
to the post-2014 Global Action Programmeon ESD underscoring the various priority action areas, including policy support, whereby
the RCE networks are expected to contributetowards ESD implementation beyond 2014(see Chapter 8).Part II

Global policies provide coordination of actions among the national and global actors
and often provide principles of actions – bases of conduct of implementation thatusually accompany statements of policies – in the regional areas and localities.
The RCE community being a global undertaking with connections to UNU andthe Ubuntu Alliance (see Chapter 1) has a unique advantage and opportunity forengaging in the international policy processes in thematic and sectoral development areas, particularly through RCE participation at important global events.
For example, at RCE community side-events at CBD 10th Conference of Parties(COP10) in Nagoya, Japan, and CBD COP11 in Hyderabad, India, participating
RCEs shared insights into innovative approaches through education to address
the interconnected issues of biodiversity, ecosystems and livelihoods, interactionsof nature with culture, society and economy; at Rio+20 they shared experiences
on “Multistakeholder Learning Towards Green Society” and at the 5th Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD V) some African RCEs
joined UNU and other UN agencies in sharing examples of collaborative partnerships on ESD (see Chapter 3). The success stories presented at these events could
provide useful inputs to policymaking processes.

Engagements
in International
Sustainability
Processes

The issue of linkages from international to local, as exemplified by Espoo munici- Internationalpality in Finland through RCE Espoo, is important, as is the value of intermediate Local Linkages
connections – national-regional-local. RCE Espoo is implementing and applying
key findings from EU policy such as the teaching process of learning together andmaking changes happen through human collaboration and integrative actions
both locally and globally through its innovative gardening activities. The RCEcommunity provides access to shaping policies at different levels, from global,
international to local, and the intervening ones. The global community is so large
and diverse, and various continental regions have their own commonalities. Thereis a need for systems thinking and making linkages across sectors and issues, andfor making partnerships and providing enabling environments, which policy doesat the local level. But one cannot ignore political realities, power, and the need tobring multiple sectors, including the private sector, into the discussion.
Another important point is the issue of implementation. It is frustrating to realizethat of the hundreds of global environmental agreements only a few may havemade satisfactory progress. In fact some might even have slid back, as was noted at
the Policymakers’ Roundtable at the 8th Global RCE Conference. There is, therefore, a need to exert efforts on delivery and compliance of these agreements, andof balancing carrots and sticks. ESD and the policy thereof should have the rightcircumstances and conditions for implementation that would be transformative.
Policies can be successful only if they are relevant to the local context, and thus need
to be fine-tuned to national action plans and national strategies. In the case of intergovernmental agreements, a regional approach may be in order for developing policies and action plans on ESD at the multicountry level and coordinating their implementation at the national level. This is exemplified by the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN), comprising ten Member States. The ASEAN Environmental Education Action Plans (AEEAP), 2008-2012 and 2014-2018, have recognized
RCEs in the region as an important part of the implementing mechanisms for
ESD, particularly in human resources capacity-building, networking, collaborationand communication.

145

146

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		Box 6.2
Engagement in Policy Development inSouthern Africa
RCEs in the SADC have influenced ESD policy
development and implementation. For example, in Zimbabwe in 2013 the RCE community was instrumental in linking with otherstakeholders and communities of practice toproduce a “National Education for Sustainable
Development Strategy and Action Plan for2014 and Beyond”. The RCEs have provided
forums for policy-practice dialogues that provide for non-threatening and non-hierarchical
ESD deliberations, where policymakers, grassroots practitioners and the business community have met consistently.
In terms of scaling-up possibilities, RCEs in
the SADC subregion can further collectively
influence ESD policy development and incorporate ESD in strategic plans in and across all
sectors. There are still SADC countries withno ESD policies and strategies that could
benefit from RCE support. Policy-practice dialogues and deliberations can be expanded
through RCE work, and are a rich ground forinnovation, experimentation, modeling, exhibition, learning and agency. Such fora would
benefit from bringing financial decisionmakers
together with educational quality innovatorsand researchers.

RCEs started forming in southern Africa as a response to the need to re-orient education towards sustainability. RCE formation in the region was a two-way
process, both as a result of and an influence on ESD
policy development. Member States in the Southern
African Development Community (SADC) were party
to the UN resolution that declared the DESD. These
RCEs have mobilized a wealth of experience fromtheir networking, research, ESD policy development,
capacity development and change-oriented practices(see Chapter 8 and Box 6.2).

Influence at the National and State Levels
RCEs and national and state policymakers have, insome cases, engaged each other in ESD in innovative
ways along the lines of government policies and strategies for implementation. In this model, RCEs insome countries work closely with the national and state governments to help achieve sustainable development goals, implement projects, create good practices
and provide links to global RCE networks.

Policy Mandates and ESD Integrationin National Development Plans
It is desirable for countries to have National Sustainable Development Plans that include education, andhave a mandate for ESD in national and subordinate
plans. Within this schema, it is essential to integrate ESD principles into educational policies and aligneducation with thematic and sectoral developmental
processes at various levels, and then ensure long-term
implementation.

Policy integration is a two-way street – from policy to practice, and symbioticallyfrom practice to policy, moving from individual pilot projects to long-term learning
towards sustainability. That takes learning with sustainability in mind beyond casesof isolated practice towards the mainstream. In this area, international and intergovernmental organizations as well as international ESD networks can contribute,with RCEs as partners.
Effective policy change and alignment calls for a clear image of the kinds of policies
being targeted for advancement of ESD. Education policymakers need arguments
showing that ESD makes education more relevant, improves its quality and encourages students to commit more. When talking to policymakers, such as thoseholding responsibility for mitigating climate change, one would need credible andconvincing arguments and data; for example, on the ability of ESD to contribute toclimate change mitigation and adaptation.

Part II

The influence national governments can have on global ESD movements is well Influencing Global
exemplified by the Government of Japan, which has long been a strong supporter Movementsof ESD. Japan proposed the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development(2005-2014) in the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation in 2002, which waslater adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2002. The
Government of Japan has not only nurtured domestic RCEs but also, in a broader
context, supported, through UNU, the global RCE movement and the networkingof universities through ProSPER.Net (see Chapter 2). Via these platforms it hascontributed towards encouraging other countries to better appreciate the role of
ESD in national development processes.
The education sector, by and large, has been responsive to ESD integration into Championing ESD
policy and practice, envisioning best practice of ESD for integrative purposes espe- and RCEs
cially on issues being addressed by the RCE community, and encouraging RCEs
to document the best happening in schools and education departments of universities to showcase to government ministries.
Another area of influence is that of national governmental policies helping to synergize learning for national sustainable development agendas and at the sametime promoting the goals of the DESD through development of national ESD strategies. In this process it is strategic to involve universities, which could then assume
leadership in the functioning of RCEs. To have a national government agency(or agencies) spearheading the RCE movement nationally is a trend in the right
direction and, hopefully, this phenomenon can be replicated widely. The National
Environment Management Authority (NEMA) of Kenya, for example, champions
local RCEs, and includes them in their national ESD strategy. NEMA focuses onnational coordination, capacity-building and funding, while RCEs work on implementation of ESD projects and turning national strategy into concrete actions inlocal communities. The Kenyan Parliament has established a basic education act,
and the National Education Board has made in it prescriptions for ESD. ESD policy for Kenya and for curriculum development in the country has been moved tothe institutional level at universities. The Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture
and Technology (JKUAT), a member of RCE Greater Nairobi, has developed its
local policy on ESD and trained lecturers on mainstreaming ESD in the existing
curriculum.
Active support of governments to RCEs is important and should be documented
as best practice. The case of Kenya is very special, and it is encouraging to notethat this trend is apparently happening in some other countries as well (UNU-IAS,2014) such as in the case of RCE Greater Phnom Penh in Cambodia.
Re-orienting policy and policy processes is part of the policy cycle. Policy goals, Contribution inmeans and situations could change, thus necessitating a continuous system Re-orientationof policy review and re-orientation. Unfortunately, in many instances the over- of Policy Processes
riding value placed on economic considerations tends to compromise socialand environmental aspects of sustainable development, downgrading, among
others, ethical values, human rights and environmental safeguards. Policymakers with vested interests are likely to distort realities by re-orienting po-

147

148

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs

		licies to suit certain political agenda, unsupportive of sustainable development, to the detriment of local communities and society as a whole. RCEs
can therefore serve as an unbiased protector of sound policies to ensure thatsocial, ethical and environmental injustices are not tolerated. This is exemplified by the contribution of RCE Waikato in protecting the rights and authority of Mãori guardianship of traditional land, culture and natural surroundings
through sustainable resource management policy (Box 6.3).

Governments
Utilizing RCEs:
Policymaking andpiloting

Developing national plans and influencing educational and sectoral policymaking processes are areas where RCEs can contribute. It is wise for government agencies to capitalize on the expertise of RCEs. By virtue of being multistakeholder-based and interdisciplinary in approach to action, the RCEs
could be tapped as a resource in developing community-based ESD actionplans. As an example, the Indonesian Ministry of National Education andCulture relied not only on its domestic RCEs – currently RCEs Yogyakarta, Bogor and East Kalimantan
Box 6.3– but also took advantage of the Asia-Pacific RCE netRCE Policy Engagement: An example
work to develop a community-based ESD action plan
(Box 6.4). This is a succinct example of how RCEs
New Zealand’s Resource Management Act is
contribute to policymaking at the national and subheralded as a model for sustainable managenational levels as well as to the implementation ofment policy with its stated purpose of “susprograms and activities contained in the action plans.
tainable management of New Zealand’s natuThis brings to light the issue of the importance of conral and physical resources”. With the current
tinental networks – that the utility of these networks
pre-eminence given to economic growth,transcends local or national boundaries.
the provisions in the Kaitiakitanga Resource
Management Act (Māori guardianship and
Policy influence by example is another encouraging
authority over traditional lands, forests andtrend. Stakeholders of RCE initiatives are not only
so forth) stewardship and landscape values
beneficiaries but also active executors of project actiwere seen as an impediment to development
vities. In terms of undertaking a pilot initiative to debecause of consultation requirements andmonstrate the role of communities in shaping natioenvironmental values. A proposed redefininal policies on sustainable development, RCE Phnomtion of sustainable management was propoPenh, Cambodia, offers a good example of assuming
sed, namely to “achieve timely, efficient andleadership in a project on sustainable agriculture (seecost-effective resource management proChapter 4). The RCE undertook the project in 2011,
cesses”. This refers to procedures to speed
working with farmers to address the national policy
up obtaining consent for development. This
towards improving agricultural production whilebrief example shows the contested ground of
decreasing the use of chemicals for agriculture in thepolicy for sustainability; it also demonstrates
context of ESD, sustainable livelihoods and sustainthe kind of opportunities that arise for RCEs
able production. On-farm experiences have helped
to engage with and contribute to shaping
embed sustainable agriculture and ESD in the school
policy. In this case, RCE Waikato collaborated
curricula. Learning among pupils and parents (evenwith other organizations to oppose the prothose who are not farmers) has continued even at
posed changes. The Māori party prevented
home. Lessons learned from this project have been
the changes from proceeding in Parliament.
useful inputs towards shaping government policies
The importance of ethics can be seen in thisthat could be implemented nationwide.
example of resource management where sustainability could have been redefined to serve
As higher education and research institutions are sieconomic priorities, at the expense of Māori
gnificant stakeholders in RCE networks, they are exinterests and environmental safeguards. pected to serve as resource bases for technical exper-

Part IItise, providing specialist opinion on certain issues ofimportance to assist governments and the public atlarge. Through their interventions, the ESD and SD
voices of the RCEs can be inputs to policy and decisionmaking processes. RCE Saskatchewan in Canada
is an example of an RCE influencing government policymaking (Box 6.5).

Box 6.4
Engagement of Continental RCEs informulation of ESD Policies
The Indonesian Ministry of National Education
and Culture endorsed the initiative of RCE
Yogyakarta to utilize the Asia-Pacific RCEs todevelop the Yogyakarta Action Plan on Community-based Education for Sustainable Development, during the 3rd Asia-Pacific RCE
Meeting held in Yogyakarta in January 2011.
The plan focused on youth, schools and biodiversity. Several ESD activities in Yogyakarta
and its neighbouring areas are based on thisaction plan. The participating RCEs, in addition to Yogyakarta, were Bogor, Cebu, Chubu,
Delhi, East Kalimantan, Greater Phnom Penh,
Incheon, Penang and Tongyeong.

RCE Minna in Nigeria exemplifies how governments
can lead promotion of RCEs, and how RCEs can provide a platform for people – from political leaders to thegrassroots – to come together to implement policies.
The Niger State Government is a founding supporter ofthe RCE and recognizes the importance of domesticating the concept from the national to the grassroots
level. As to the policy relating to ESD, the government focuses on access and quality of education
at all levels, and on developing programs of specialized teacher education with an emphasis on
producing quality teachers. RCE Minna has beenan active catalyst of ESD in Nigeria, and acts as
mediator of policies from the State government and of response to these policies at the grassroots. Mayors participate in discussions with people at thegrassroots on RCE and ESD. The Governor of the State has brought a policy where people at the local level can own their own special projects, and educate
and give themselves particular provisions to enhance their living without waiting for the State bureaucracy to act. All the states in the country have started toemulate this policy. Local councils and a people‘s forum initiated by the governor gather people’s ideas and suggestions about initiatives for the policymakers.
This encourages people who have been party to the initiative of policy formulation
to be committed to successful implementation and sustainability of their ESD
projects.

RCEs are promising vehicles for influencing policymaking and implementation Policy
as they can, from their experience on the ground, find what has worked and ex- Implementation
plain how it might be emulated elsewhere or up-scaled, taking into account local
differences. RCEs are agents of change and transformative learning, although implementation based on lessons learned can be challenging. The problem is that
not all the stakeholders are involved from the beginning and so lack a sense ofownership of the policies and their implementation. The root of the problem istherefore the lack of contributions from relevant sectors. RCEs, therefore, should
not just be influencing policies but should also be involved in building partnerships with multiple stakeholders from various sectors from the commencement of
the policymaking process, so that all stakeholders can be committed to successful
implementation of the policies.
It is evident that RCEs have made significant contributions in the field of influencing policy, and while RCEs cross-link issues to make policies work better, mostpolicies may be one-directional, that is, lacking feedback. The RCE movement

149

150

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		Box 6.5
Providing Technical Inputs to Policymaking
In Canada, considerable constitutional powers related to natural resources and energy
reside with provincial governments rather
than the national federal government. In
October 2008, the Government of Saskatchewan created an initiative to explore valueadded opportunities related to the uranium
industry with a specific focus on developing
nuclear power. In light of public concerns,
the government held hearings to receive
public input in 2009. A relatively short timeframe was set for these hearings. Given theflexibility of RCE Saskatchewan‘s structure,
its focused ESD mandate, and its connection
to specific researchers among four of its higher
education partners, the RCE was able to put
together what amounted to the only higher
education submission at the hearings. RCE
Saskatchewan‘s constructive critique of the
proposal through a sustainable livelihoodlens and its seven sustainable development
issue areas played a role in the Government‘s
subsequent decision to broaden its consideration of energy options in future hearings.
Because of the presence of an RCE in Saskatchewan, the provincial government‘s decision on a controversial public policy issue
was able to be informed by peer-reviewed
scholarship and technical expertise provided
by scholars in the RCE‘s partner organizations, along with the sustainability concernsof the community that are built into the RCE‘sstructural mandate. should be taken as an indication that this initiative
is working and be accepted at the grassroots levelto then drive ESD further. Post-DESD, governments
across the world should play a more active role andtake ownership of ESD initiatives. RCEs now need
top-level policymakers to appreciate and acknowledge their work. Many policymakers still do not understand the value of ESD, and RCEs have had to educate
them. Now there is an opportunity, if the top leaders
acknowledge the importance of RCEs, of moving to a
new level.

Influence at the Local andOrganizational Levels
In policymaking at the local level, the support ofmayors and city/municipality executive and legislative bodies and committees is essential. One cannot
ignore the fact that although the executive branchesof local governments propose and execute programs
and projects, it is the legislative limbs of governance that dispose of resources. It is therefore important that both branches of government be engaged
with RCEs. RCE Buea has a number of local councilors as active members and more local legislators
are expected to join. The RCE is consulted by policymakers on decisions regarding ESD. This alliance between policymakers and the RCE can be up-scaled if
governments at all levels officially acknowledge andsupport the RCE.

Being community-based networks, RCEs have potentially significant roles to play in local policymaking
and implementation. Local innovations on SD and
ESD that break silos and cross disciplinary boundaries through working with policy and practice need to
be promoted and recognized. Policymakers ought tomove beyond pilot projects and it may be relatively easier done at the local andorganizational levels since results can be shown vividly.
The Supreme Court of India directive that ESD be incorporated in mainstream
education in the country had the states struggling to adequately revise the curricula and textbooks with ESD concepts. RCE Guwahati engaged in policy advocacy forinfusion of ESD concepts in the mainstream school curriculum of Assam state.
The Board of Secondary Education, Assam, played the central role, and RCE partners Centre for Environment Education and Gauhati University added value byoffering technical support (see also Chapter 8).

Part II

151

152

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		

RCE Bohol through its enabling mechanism encourages and assists its diverse
membership of government, non-governmental organizations and private academic institutions, in provincial government SD policymaking to ensure implementation of SD in their individual mandated areas of concern.
RCE Munich enables frequent exchanges with stakeholders and communication
with the administration and political wings of the city government, which allows
ESD activities to prosper. The RCE works closely with the Department of Education, Town Hall, the Department of Education and Sport, the Institute of Pedagogy
and the Department of Health and Ecology. Three City Guidelines (Education,
Ecology and Solidaric-City-Community) highlight ESD. It also actively supports
new approaches of local governance.
RCE Tongyeong is a special case in that the city government is the leader of the
RCE and therefore intrinsic to local governance (Box 6.6; see also Chapter 2 fora related issue). It is incumbent on the local government to utilize the RCE as itembraces a wide range of stakeholders. The city of Tongyeong itself, by and large,
is aware of the RCE’s existence as was observed by participants of the 7th Global
RCE Conference in Tongyeong.
While the Tongyeong model is a success story, one cannot be complacent.
The sustainability of the RCE functioning as it should be (in the case of RCE
Tongyeong) hinges heavily on the mayor, and it is not
wise to assume that successive government administrations would continue to support the RCE agenda.
Box 6.6
Current officials often cast shadows of doubt on, andLocal Government Coordinating an RCE
are thus unsupportive of, initiatives of past administrations. There are real cases among RCEs to support
In Tongyeong the city government leads
this claim. It is thus important and advisable that
the ESD movement while the RCE uses its
knowledge of RCE contributions is expanded to inclunetwork’s expertise to help define specificde local politicians regardless of political party affiliaprojects and actions. Members of the city
tions, whether they are currently holding office or not,council participate in RCE Tongyeong deciand whether they are in government or in the opposion-making, and RCE Tongyeong partners
sition. Politicians currently not in power might in thetherefore have a strong role in informing
future come into power, and thus it is important thatand influencing the decisions of the policythey are and continue to be RCE supporters as well.
makers.
Here is an experience regarding affecting
policy processes: during the last local election an international ESD forum held in
Tongyeong was attended by many RCE stakeholders in which potential election candidates
also participated and talked about a possible
ESD agenda. Devising a policy paper forcandidates in local elections and having an
educational forum for politicians was a way
the RCE could influence the policy process.


Another strategy for policy influence is to use RCEs
to supplement programs and activities carried out through the formal governance system in their respective regions. As generally perceived, in formal governance ESD initiatives could be caught in bureaucratic
wrangling that might hinder ESD and SD actions.
This is where the RCE can be mobilized within thesphere of influence and control of formal governancefor policymaking and implementation purposes. This
strategy has proven to be successful in one particular
RCE in the Philippines. In the San Francisco munici-

Part IIpality of Cebu province, governance is community-driven, and families and individuals play a strong role in sustainable development decisions. This grassroots,
multistakeholder approach mimics the approach of RCEs; in this community,
RCE Cebu itself has become one of the instruments of local governance. It is
gratifying to witness the grassroots discussing in their own ways global issues on
SD, ESD, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and other related global
agenda, and how to translate them into local actions. Through the initiative of
the mayor of one municipality, the RCE stakeholders have been instrumental ineffectuating changes. The system, with the participation of RCE Cebu, is informal
governance supplementary to the formal system, which has been found effective
in delivering ESD and SD to the communities – a clear demonstration of how
RCEs influence policy development and programs.
In Thailand, the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy (SEP) of His Majesty the Kingis the cornerstone of the Thailand National Economic and Social Development
Plan. RCE Cha-am advocates the practice of SEP in its ESD and SD activities incollaboration with various ministries, government agencies (national and local),the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and civil societies, thereby
strengthening the link with national policy.
Local governments might serve as facilitators in providing platforms for RCEs
to initiate innovation and engage in partnerships with relevant sectors and organizations. This model of engagement has been successful in Espoo, Finland,
under the so-called Urban Mill concept operated by asmall private concern involved in innovation spaces.
The city has its own activities in this space along withBox 6.7
Local Government Coordinating
universities and SMEs in the sphere of urban design/
RCE Multistakeholders
planning driven by the people. Other elements include
small start-up activities; for example, a company operOkayama joined the Johannesburg Summit
ating with universities and the city on real life marketing and connecting activities. It also has a workshop
in 2002 and started ESD activities. The Okaywith strong city involvement, not of city bureaucrats,
ama ESD initiative had the support of the city
but those who implement, dream and plan for action.
and RCE Okayama was among the first seven
It is an example of an RCE doing boundary-expanding
RCEs acknowledged in 2005. The three mainfeatures of RCE Okayama are: (1) Multistakeactions, opening innovative ventures, and creating
holder participation in RCE activities with supsomething entirely new using physical, virtual andport of universities, local committees and citimental spaces.
zen groups; (2) Policy of the local government
to promote ESD using financial and human
The role of local governments is indeed immensely
resources; and (3) Activity of RCE Okayama
important. Without government support, the RCE
supported by local action communities, inmay be weakened in view of the lack of connections
cluding those from non-formal and formal
with decisionmakers and policymakers. Local governeducation sectors. Post 2014, RCE Okayama
ments have the ability and power to widen participatiplans to scale up with new concepts such ason, in both formal and non-formal education sectors,
putting ESD promotion into each city’s policy,
and engage multistakeholders in the community.
and encouraging local governments to act
This is the foundation of the RCE and its source offor ESD and municipal stakeholders. The newstrength. This model is exemplified by the situationcity mayor is as keen as the former mayor toin Okayama, Japan (Box 6.7).
engage in ESD activities 

153

154

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		

Transformation at the grassroots level is a bailiwick of RCEs in view of their being
in touch with on-the-ground realities while also having expertise in ESD and SD.
The way engagement is conducted depends on local norms and practices as wellas on tradition and culture. In Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, the principles ofgrassroots involvement are practiced through a unique initiative known as the“Seeds of Promise”. This model is built on the guiding principles of sustainability and governed by empowered residents. It helps transform the neighborhood
by: promoting collaboration and community stakeholder partnerships; applying
sustainable development best practices; building local resident leadership andtrust; deep listening to neighbourhood and resident voices; meeting the needs
and wants expressed by the neighbourhood; and empowering the neighbourhood
community to achieve its goals. The City of Grand Rapids is looking to replicate
the model within other parts of the city.

Policy Research

While RCEs are engaged in various ways with policymakers and decisionmakers,
they have roles to play in policy research to provide support to policy processes,
considering that one of the core elements of an RCE is to conduct research anddevelopment to advance ESD knowledge. Policy research is a crucial ingredientfor informed, good decisionmaking to increase the impact of policies and learn
the process of linking policymaking and implementation. This policymaking andimplementation interface is well depicted by the RCE Minna experience describedearlier in this chapter.
Higher education institutions play important roles in policy research both in respect to their own research agenda (see Chapter 2) and acting in alliance withlike-minded academic partners. The cluster approach to policy research on sustainability is an effective way to support policymaking, where allies address ESD
issues for purposes of contributing to sustainability transformation of their respective organizations and influencing policymakers.
By working together, higher education institutions can share cases that demonstrate change processes towards sustainability. Many of these institutions
are stakeholders, a number of them leaders, of RCEs and they harness synergies between RCEs and their academic alliances. UNU-IAS has under its auspices
ProSPER.Net, the sustainability education and research network of universities(see Chapter 2). ESD networks not only influence policies on ESD of member
institutions but also engage in policy implementation on sustainability in higher
education.
Policy development is a core element in UNU’s mission, which connects closelywith the needs of Member States in terms of research and policy development.
Serving as a think tank that can pursue knowledge for its own sake, unlike any
academic university, UNU is focused on how its research can be useful to theinternational society. This goal is underscored in particular by UNU-IAS’s own
mission to advance efforts towards a more sustainable future for all, through policyrelevant research and capacity development focused on sustainability and its social,economic and environmental dimensions. The RCE community is expected tocontribute towards policy research and development.

Part II

Policies that entail ESD implementation refer to how education, especially ESD,
is included in national SD plans. Policies also relate to sectoral mandates for ESD.
ESD policies deal with national curricula and local contents thereof, formal education, teacher training, non-formal education, community and civil society participation, and the private sector.
Policy support is one of the five priority action areas of the GAP, and the RCEcommunity can make meaningful contributions to its implementation. Chapter 8
provides examples and highlights how RCEs can assume their roles in this regard.
There is no one model that fits all so the question now is about what model of en- Summary
gagement fits, as various modalities may require different conditions. The modelof engagement appropriate for intergovernmental and international organizations
is that of providing supporting roles towards promoting ESD and in implementing the goals of the DESD in light of their respective mandates. These organizations, including UNU, are in appropriate positions to share the global perspectiveof ESD issues and challenges at various levels of policy and in various policy areas,
as well as of the emerging post-2014 GAP. RCEs can provide useful inputs to international sustainability processes through important global events. RCEs acting
as clusters may also contribute to policymaking and implementation of actionplans from regional/subregional (multicountry) vantage points, as exemplified by
the ASEAN and southern African RCE experiences.
At the national level, there could be a leadership approach to engagement (e.g. Japan, Kenya, Indonesia and Cambodia). Japan‘s impact is far-reaching in this regard.
The Government of Japan assumed a leadership role in pushing for the adoption
by the UN of the DESD in 2002, and supports ESD networking through UNU
in higher education through ProSPER.Net, and community-based multistakeholder networking through RCEs. Kenya provides a good model of leadershipwhere RCEs are recognized formally as agents of change and the national government promotes and mentors RCEs in the country. The same is true in Indonesia
with its Ministry of National Education and Culture, and in Cambodia with its
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Certainly, there are practices ofthis kind in other countries as well.
At the subnational and local levels, the approach of engagement could be thatof an enabler and having a facilitative role for policymakers. It is interesting tonote that RCE Minna, for example, was the child of the Niger State Government.
Espoo is another good example, showing the enabling conditions for policy and amarket of ideas and an innovation for ESD, providing the so-called Urban Mill asa space for multiple stakeholders to discuss and initiate innovative ideas on ESD
and SD. Okayama City exemplifies engagement through promotion of ESD withthe local government facilitating multistakeholder involvement. Other models of
engagement are demonstrated by RCEs Tongyeong, Cebu and Grand Rapids. RCE
Saskatchewan has demonstrated policy influence on the provincial government’s
energy policy. Clusters of RCEs could also work together to tackle local, subnationalor national issues – for example, as the Asia-Pacific RCEs did for Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

155

156

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs		

At the organizational level, RCEs by their constitutive character are supposed toinfluence policies, programs and projects of member organizations and otherstakeholders. A few examples are illustrated by initiatives such as those of RCE
Greater Western Sydney and RCE Guatemala (see Chapter 2). Through clusters of
institutions, HEIs, for example, transforming member institutions towards sustainability can be facilitated or even accelerated as exemplified by ProSPER.Net,
the Global Universities Partnership on Environment and Sustainability (GUPES)
of UNEP, and other ESD-related networks.
Yet acknowledging change is not easy, and the need to focus on the vast portionof the population eager to make changes should be recognized with urgency. It
is important to underscore the roles of governments in ensuring successful implementation of ESD processes. Also, one can learn from the experiences of theengagements of RCEs with policymakers and politicians around the world.
Finally, in all of these RCE actions that could potentially make policy and decisionmaking influence, one, of course, cannot deny the critical factor of resourcing.
People tend to look at programs in terms of funding; there is a need to encourage
stakeholders to mobilize their own and share resources (see Chapter 1). This boils
down to the issue of behaviour change, both at the level of regions, organizations
and individuals (see Chapter 5). The difficulty of doing so and how to change to accept new things is a big challenge. RCEs are about being learning networks wherestakeholders continue to learn by themselves and from each other in pursuit ofcreating sustainable societies.

References
UNU-IAS. (2014). 8th Global Conference of the RCEs – Regional Centres of Expertiseon Education for Sustainable Development. Yokohama: UNU-IAS.

Part II

Reflections
An RCE is an effective platform for promoting ESD. During my tenure as DirectorGeneral of the Department of Environmental Quality Promotion (DEQP) of the
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Thailand, it was our policy tosupport the establishment of RCEs in the country. In collaboration with UNU-IAS,
my department contributed to the facilitation of the development processes of the
now-acknowledged RCE Trang and RCE Cha-am and supported funding to someof the RCE activities and programs. While the government sector supports the RCE
movement, it is equally important at the political level to engage RCEs to cope with
ESD at the local, national and global levels thereby enhancing the RCEs’ roles.
Monthip Sriratana Tabucanon
Former Member of Parliament (Democrat Party)
Thailand

157

158

Chapter 6 Influencing Development and Implementation of SD and ESD Policies,
Programs and Projects: Role of RCEs

		

Reflections

We live in an age of immediacy. With a 140 character limit, Twitter provides instantheadlines. With seemingly limitless information available to us online, we seek immediate answers to questions. I read once that the American children’s television program, Sesame Street, provided a maximum segment length of 90 seconds, cateringto the short attention span of toddlers. In some respects, the technological revolution
has reduced us all to the attention span of toddlers!
The problem with our expectation for quick, short answers is that complex issues
require complex solutions. The issues being addressed by the Regional Centres forExpertise are not simple, but they are of the utmost importance.
I was privileged to participate in the RCE Saskatchewan event in the community of
Nipawin in May of 2013. I was impressed by how the event brought together diverse
groups to address issues of sustainability. The RCE Saskatchewan partners are serving as a catalyst for change in our province. This reminds me of Her Majesty the
Queen of England’s comments to the United Nations General Assembly in 2010.
She said, “I know of no single formula for success, but over the years I have observedthat some attributes of leadership are universal, and are often about finding ways ofencouraging people to combine their efforts, their talents, their insights, their enthusiasm, and their inspiration, to work together”.
I am grateful to the RCE for bringing people together to explore creative, lasting solutions that will enable our planet to thrive for centuries to come. In our region, forexample, RCE Saskatchewan not only challenges our current practices with an eye
to the future, they are also looking to the past for answers. Saskatchewan’s Aboriginal
peoples hold the key to much wisdom about our place on this earth. I will close withwords attributed to Chief Ahtahkakoop of the Cree Nation, as handed down by theelders. He spoke these words in the late 19th century during treaty negotiations with
the Queen’s representative: “Let us think not of ourselves but of our children’s children. We hold our place among the tribes as chiefs and councilors because our people
think we have wisdom above others amongst us. Then let us show our wisdom. Let us
show our wisdom by choosing the right path now while we yet have a choice”.
Vaughn Solomon Schofield
Lieutenant Governor,
Province of Saskatchewan
Honorary Patron, RCE Saskatchewan

Part II

159

160

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

Part II

Chapter 7

Enhancing Monitoring and
Evaluation Practices in RCEs

Rob O’Donoghue and Zinaida Fadeeva

The midterm of the DESD came with imperatives to strengthen monitoringand evaluation work in RCEs into the end of Decade. The processes examined
here are how RCE evaluation has been emerging through an unfolding succession of approaches initiated in various regions of the world. These initiatives have recently informed a hybrid evaluation tool that has been piloted in
the SADC region. The approach used has been centred on the adaptive useof a framework tool for co-engaged evaluation of RCEs and the value adding
outcomes of their ESD initiatives in a local context. The emerging evaluation
tools are to be accompanied by continuing capacity development in evaluation
practices so as to strengthen the quality of data and depth of analysis of activities, impacts and value creation.

161

162

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

The Cultural
Context of RCE
Evaluation

A deliberation process on evaluation in RCEs developed midway through the UN
Decade, as the pressure to evaluate programs and impacts escalated and a variety
of stakeholders, including the RCEs themselves, wanted to better assess and communicate the value of their ESD activities. Here differences between what one
might call participatory perspectives and more empirical or impact assessment
approaches that privileged tangible measures of change, were not easily reconciled. It became clear, during the Global RCE Conference in Montreal (2009), thatthe necessary approaches to evaluation were not widely evident and expertise in
conducting evaluation activities was not readily accessible in most RCE contexts.
It also became clear that many of the RCEs shared a view that evaluation should
be based on the principles of self-reflection and evidence of change. UNU-IAS
thus initiated a deliberative process, and following the decision of the Global RCE
Conference in The Netherlands to establish a working group on evaluation, a concept paper was developed.1 This was followed by a consultative, online process thatwas carried into the Global RCE Conference in Tongyeong (South Korea), whichhighlighted the importance of continuing work towards better monitoring andevaluation.
The process followed here involved clarifying the nature of RCEs and trying todevelop principles for the assessment of RCE processes and the impact of theirdiverse ESD change practices. This work noted an expectation that the RCE evaluation should be approached as a collective learning process among RCE stakeholders,
including elements of peer-facilitation and exchange.2 This approach was primarilya strategy for developing capacity in monitoring and evaluation within the RCEcommunity. Some early evaluation was undertaken by Geoff Scott in RCE Greater
Western Sydney (see Box 7.3 for some details) with complementary perspectives
emerging in RCE Graz-Styria, facilitated by Clemens Mader, and with RCE European Advisor, Jos Hermans, adding to an emerging suite of complementary perspectives. Key attributes of all of these have contributed to the mix of perspectives
integrated into the hybrid approach under review in this chapter.
Many other RCEs, including an emerging African regional network of RCEs coordinated through the SADC Regional Environmental Education Centre in Howick,South Africa, participated in the deliberation on evaluation. This process becamea testing ground for diverse perspectives as well as a consensus-seeking process
on evaluation practices and principles suitable for RCEs. For example, one of theearliest propositions was that of establishing a baseline from which an evaluation
could be conducted – the step that became a part of the constitutive and strategic
evaluations undertaken by some RCEs. Other perspectives were centred on the importance of collaborative review so that all interest groups in an RCE are included in an
1 The members of the Working Group included Rob O’Donohue (RCE Makana), Zinaida Fadeeva andAbel Atiti (UNU-IAS), Jos Hermans (RCE European Advisor), Clemens Mader (RCE Graz-Styria), Jim
Taylor and Tich Pesanayi (RCE KwaZulu Natal), and Geoff Scott (RCE Greater Western Sydney).
2 Talking about evaluation instruments in the latter part of the article, the term assessment is used forwhen participants have to appraise something and generate perspective and data to justify it. Evaluation is the appreciative grasp and sense that emerges through a series of appraising assessments and,eventually, the value creation that people come to have a sense of or are directing their endeavours
towards. This is a fairly open-ended use of the concepts of assessment, appraisal and evaluation usedwith the intent of not being too inscriptive and recognizing that there is more scope when working inan arena that goes beyond schooling.

Part IIevaluation process. The latter received positive responses that exemplified participatory approaches, and appreciative enquiry emerged as an important constituent ofevaluation in RCEs as collaborative civil society initiatives that needed to monitor
and evaluate programs so as to be accountable to all involved, including funders.
Alongside this, a clarifying of strategic purpose also emerged as a priority. It was notedthat some tangible baseline data, appreciative records and a strategic assessment
could lend themselves to some sort of meta-analysis of RCEs, a useful feature forthe reporting of outcomes to the global network of RCEs. While such roles had
been originally attributed to UNU-IAS, some other processes supporting metaanalyses have been initiated by the RCEs and their stakeholders.

With the RCEs in the region having emerged at differing times within the DESD,
taking many forms (some being centred on cities while others had a regional or
small-country character) and located in regions with unique attributes, the ideaof a baseline for an evaluation process became a concern for the development ofcontextual monitoring and evaluation data.

Towards a SituatedFrameworkfor Evaluating
RCEs

From the beginning of the development of RCEs, with the seven pioneering RCEs
in 2005, the Global RCE Service Centre requested annual reports, including basic
information on the characteristics of the regions, RCE governance, and flagshipprojects. Those reports, communicated as document files, provided a first reflection
by RCEs on their development and, later, on how they had changed since theirestablishment. Until 2009 they remained the basis for the assessment of thecollective development of RCEs. In addition to the analysis by the ESD team of
UNU-IAS, some other forms of data collection and reflection have emerged (seeBox 7.1).
To support the reporting process, an online portal wasdeveloped that allows RCEs to enter and access theirinformation online, and through this portal also get an
insight to international processes and activities fromother RCEs. The portal was structured to qualitatively
assess processes of transformation through the partnership activities of the RCEs according to changes
in their governance, shared understanding of challenges and goals, types of stakeholder involvement, andeducational and learning principles, as well as innovation processes (Mader, 2013). This ongoing work fed
into imperatives to assess, monitor and evaluate RCE
activities and a number of innovative evaluation initiatives were pilot tested.
As has been described in the previous section, development of the Concept Paper by the Evaluation Working
Group marked another stage in the development of
RCE assessment. This working document became areference point for the pilot evaluation practices ofBox 7.1
Examples of Student Engagementin the Evaluation Processes
From 2009 a series of student seminars started
at the University of Graz (RCE Graz-Styria), in
cooperation with the Global RCE Service Centre, focused on assessment endeavours andmeth-ods for monitoring and evaluation ofand by RCEs. In addition to the online analysisof data, students tested appreciative enquiry
through online or personal interviews resulting
in narrated and written stories about the RCEs,
communicating more subjective and experience-based knowledge. A similar activity was
undertaken in 2014 by the students of the University of Luneburg. 

163

164

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

RCEs Goa, Mumbai, Delhi and Pune (India), RCE Phnom Penh (Cambodia), RCE
Cha-am (Thailand), RCE Kyrgyzstan and RCE Okayama (Japan) from the middleof 2013 until the beginning of 2014. The development of an evaluation process,as a hybrid mix of complementary perspectives on and approaches to monitoringand evaluation, has brought further insights on the need for diverse assessment
processes to report on and develop capacity in the ESD practices of an expanding global RCE community. More insights into the portfolio of RCE evaluation
practices are provided in the next section. Further work on the appreciative review
of how the collaboration had been constituted in a particular context has been conducted by the RCEs in the SADC region, within a project supported by UNU-IAS.

Portfolio of
Approaches for
RCE Evaluation

The evaluation literature on the review of education projects is characterized
by the emergence of evaluation as a professional field. Broad trends are notablefrom the 1980s when positive approaches like appreciative inquiry took on a participatory character within constructivist perspectives on learning and change.
Alongside this in the 1990s developmental evaluation emerged, and more
recently there has been the advent of realist evaluation centred on interpreting
evidence and the analysis of the theory of change that underpins prevailingtrajectories of learning and value creation.

Box 7.2
Learning During RCE Evaluations
RCE Goa
RCE Goa has been facilitating collaborative
research, development and promotion of ESD
in Goa. It would specifically like to address
local sustainability challenges such as tourism
and coastal and waste management issues in
the region.
The RCE assessment exercise aimed to facilitate collective learning so as to improve
the quality of the RCE’s work by expanding
its contribution to transformative learningand sustainability change, and to enable
collaborative work as a networked community generating diverse social learning andchange initiatives. The assessment provided
an opportunity to generate monitoring andevaluation assessments that are helpful forreporting, and thus improve the RCE as a social learning-to-change initiative. Assessment
helped to generate appreciative evidence
on change-oriented activities of the RCE asregional stakeholders working in contexts ofsocial learning to foster change that reducescont.

As has been indicated earlier, in 2013 several approaches were suggested for evaluation of the RCEs – constitutive evaluation, appreciative inquiry and strategic
evaluation. These were used by individual RCEs insome of the early evaluations reported above.
Appreciative enquiry focuses on the positive experiencesof RCE members in realizing ambitions stated by the
RCE application and goals developed on the basisof the RCE’s stated vision after acknowledgementby the Ubuntu Committee. An appreciative enquiry
approach as a means of collective reflection emerged
as a key tenet within the RCE community. Its primaryfunction is to develop a capacity to deepen understanding and promote a culture of program monitoring and critical review in the spheres of personal and professional
life. Though challenging, this helps an RCE to collectively take stock of things and improve the quality of actions. Such an exercise revisits and reflects on networking and governance; strategic areas such as focus,
partnerships, approaches of engagement; learningfor change; RCE evolution in terms of partners, projects and change-oriented perspectives including
major constraints and ways of improvement; successin terms of shared indicators, good practices andevidence of success; local-global linkages; and thepotential of up-scaling and sustainability (Box 7.2 presents impressions and learning experiences of RCEs
Goa and Okayama in the course of the appreciativeenquiry evaluative process).

Part II

The evaluation of the RCEs succeeded in generating
data that demonstrated the strong points of their workand pointed out areas that required further work. Clarifying strategic focus of collective actions has become
one of the results of evaluation, as evaluation has
enabled the RCE stakeholders to centre attention on
actions that were particularly successful or on the promising side of their work, and also on how to adjust
some of the collaborative strategies in their networks.
As a result “the discussions at the workshop helped inlearning, understanding and updating the work profiles of the RCE partners” in Goa and in formulationof the Okayama Model of RCE development in RCE
Okayama (Box 7.2).
Appreciative enquiry has proved to be an effective process for analyzing and deepening intra-RCE partner
engagement as well as reinforcing key nodes of local
actors and action capacities in ESD. Moreover, the experience from such an exercise at the regional/global
level is diverse owing to the differing geographicalcontexts as well as the history and experience of individual RCEs.
Constitutive evaluation is focused on the core elementsof the RCE and its functions as stated in its inception
document, a peer-reviewed document vetted by the
Ubuntu Committee. Interestingly, in the case ofmany evaluations, while appreciative enquiry served
as the main argument for the RCEs to undertake theactivities, constitutive assessment was what guided
their evaluative enquiry and the appraisal of ESD activities (as in the case of RCE Greater Phnom Penhand of RCE Cha-am). Apparently, the RCE coordinators found the constitutive evaluation easier to conduct than appreciative enquiry as the latter seems torequire specialized capacities. Another reason for the
preference has emerged, somewhat unexpectedly, as
an additional strategy for engagement (or re-engagement) of the regional members in, for example, realizing the learning dimension in sustainability projects. In other words, the assessment exercises served
as learning platforms for existing and new memberson the meaning of RCEs, ESD learning practices andhow partners’ respective activities could be up-scaled
to embrace ESD more holistically.

risk. Such work has the potential to stimulate
not only change-oriented work in a local RCEcontext but also coordinated work across theRCE community and with its global stakeholders.
The evaluation process of RCE Goa helped
members decide to facilitate internal reflections and bring together key stakeholders
so as to take stock of the RCE’s activities, its
challenges and constraints, and what could
be done to overcome them. This exercise isof critical importance in helping RCE Goa set
up monitoring and evaluative assessmentsof its future activities. The discussions at theworkshop helped in learning, understanding
and updating the work profiles of the RCEpartners. This helped in collectively exploringand establishing ways to improve co-engaged
ESD work, and in the process raising the qualityof RCE Goa’s initiatives. It also helped in developing a set of indicators that would define
the impact and success of RCE work. (S. Kazi)
RCE Pune
RCE Pune was initiated in January 2007, building upon an existing network of individuals andorganizations concerned about diverse issuesof society and environment, such as livelihoods, urban planning and governance, education, housing, waste, water, transportation,and bio-diversity.
Some months ago, we and several partners
undertook an RCE evaluation, a reflection of
our networking at RCE Pune. The reflection
helped articulate what people have found ofvalue in the network and in acting together.
Partners mentioned learning, encountering
differing viewpoints, seeing interconnections,development of trust, enhanced professionaland civic efficacy, and being inspired. At apersonal level, one of the partners said, “I
have found passion, motivation, hopefulness,
inspiration, the will to go on even when theissues are difficult.”
The reflection revealed that the concept ofa local network about sustainability is itself astrength. Forums created, supported or even
cont.

165

166

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

inspired through the RCE network, such asenvironment reporting, participatory budgeting, local area design and planning exercises,
and innovative outreach through exhibits andactivities, were cited as examples of what hasgone well so far.
On governance of the network itself, it was feltthat knowing each other and having many occasions to meet and act together on specificissues of concern, are key aspects. Of particular importance is a dedicated and consistentsecretariat that keeps up the momentum andholds documentation of the work done. RCE
Pune has always been a very light structure
relying on associational activity, with the anchor organization (CEE) organically assuming
a secretariat role and maintaining a neutralrole.
For future work, partners have stressed theneed to continue collaborative work on
deepening participatory and multistakeholder
local governance, using tools like social audits,public dialogues, and information support
centres. For strengthening the governance ofthe network, partners have suggested: thatdifferent stakeholders may be part of a coreteam; the need for bridging links and especiallystronger links with bureaucracy and politicians;
regular but modest frequency of meeting (sayfour times a year) around some small actions;a well-defined but simple way of formally joining the network, with options for lay citizens
to join in too. (S. Menon)
RCE Okayama
The assessment workshop was organized withthe participation of 16 key stakeholders of RCE
Okayama, selected by the RCE Secretariat (Cityof Okayama) to ensure diversity in the background of stakeholders and representationof priority organizations. Prior to the workshop, all participants were asked to submit
a survey to share their individual reflections
on individual activities/projects of the RCE
and how the individuals perceived the RCE
network (Okayama ESD Promotion Commission) – its added values, vision and goal – asa platform for dialogue and collaboration. The
survey forms provided the baseline data withwhich to analyze the reflections
The workshop was conducted in the form ofgroup discussions with two key questions: (1)what are the achievements, that is, the positives
for your activities by being part of the network,
the kind of changes brought to yourself, yourorganization and the community and (2) what
are the challenges you have faced and what
would be needed in order to overcome them?
Although the purpose of the workshop was not
to evaluate individual projects or activities, it isworth mentioning that a number of good cases
were shared during the workshop, which showed how the themes and areas of activity andprojects have expanded over the past 10 years.
Reflections of the stakeholders resulted in theformulation of an action plan for the RCE in thearea of governance and coordination, expressed in the formulation of the Okayama Model.
Overall, the assessment workshop provided
a great opportunity for stakeholders to shareideas and reflect on the future direction of their
RCE, while the Secretariat could reconfirm theconsistency between the needs of the stakeholders and the proposed future direction.
Capitalizing on these results, RCE Okayama
hopes to contribute to further promoting ESD
through community-based actions beyond
2014. (S. Yasuda)
RCE Kyrgyzstan
Assessment of RCE Kyrgyzstan has been
conducted in conjunction with the Seminarof Competencies for ESD, co-facilitated by
UNECE and experts from UNU-IAS. This provided an interesting opportunity to exchange
ideas about the RCE’s results from the specificperspective of its contribution to regional competence development for sustainability and for
ESD.
The importance of such assessments is critical as
they provide a unique platform for exchanging
views and ideas among various ESD stakecont.

Part II

Strategic enquiry aims to develop an understandingof the social learning and change potential for theactions of various RCEs, including an assessment of
the RCE context of risk and the emerging scope andimpact of the activities being undertaken within the
RCE. Strategic enquiry, as performed, for example, by
RCE Greater Western Sydney (see Box 7.3), addresses
advancement in the areas of strategic importance for
the RCE as well as factors that influence its progress,
such as resources, barriers, and strategic linkages
throughout the process of collective actions – fromproject design to its implementation and outcomes.
Each of the three forms of evaluation – appreciative,
constitutive and strategic – were suggested to the RCEcommunity and used by it in different combinations
depending on the preferences of the stakeholders andthe stage of development of the RCE engaged in theevaluation process. While individual strategies arestill being used, it was just a matter of time before
a more coherent approach of working with a set of
evaluations emerged. The next sections provide insights into that process.

holders and experts in Kyrgyzstan. It also helps,
in our view, to increase understanding on
ESD among its main promoters – teachersand civil society representatives – increasing
their capacity for action.
As a result of this multisectoral consultation,
the partners positioned themselves not only
as interested parties of ESD but also as its
main implementers, regardless of their sectoral affiliation. The assessment process facilitated development of new project ideas andhelped consolidate efforts in their perusal.
As the seminar brought together not only
RCE members, it helped to position RCE
Kyrgyzstan as a leading network in advancing
ESD nationally, as well as to entice potential
partners to join the RCE. (Z. Dushenova and
C. Sadykova)

We noted that although each evaluation convention had a particular character and The Emergence of
requirements, there were many common features and an evolving process to- a Hybrid Framework
wards a weighty realist probing of structural mechanisms and how these function for Evaluation in RCEs
to bring about positive change. These insights allowed the team of southern African
RCEs to develop a hybrid start-up tool for framing evaluation processes in RCEs
based on the theories and practices of the evaluative approach. Figure 7.1 summarizes the perspectives that were drawn on to construct a framework tool forsituating a positive, co-engaged and developmental evaluation framework thatcan enable participants to probe practices, generate evidence of impact and assessvalue creation within the RCE network. The remainBox 7.3
der of this chapter elaborates on the design and pilot
RCE Greater Western Sydney (GWS):
implementation of this open-ended evaluation startSetting up an efficient and timely tracking
up process that can be expanded and deepened by draand improvement systemwing on the constituent perspectives in the literature(By Geoff Scott)as evaluation capabilities develop.
Contextual profiling, as a way of developing baseline
data, had emerged as a situating methodology formuch of the environment and sustainability researchin the SADC region along with the need for a graspof the way in which each RCE had been constituted.
“Constitutive evaluation” thus became an opening
feature of the evaluation framework that was to be developed for site-based collaborative evaluation acrossWe, at the RCE GWS, are very clear on
what we mean by key terms like assessment(gathering performance data on each RCE
GWS initiative to inform evidence-based
evaluation) and evaluation (making judgements of worth about what is happening ineach RCE GWS initiative and the operation of
the centre itself).
cont.

167

168

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

An interlaced, four-level evaluation framework
is being used to track and then both improveand prove the quality of what the RCE isdoing. Here we look together at:

the RCEs in the region. Drawing on the work doneby the RCE Assessment Working Group in 2013, thisopening move was then broken down into a framingof an RCE as:

1. The quality of design for each RCE project. For that we ask questions like: How
do we know this project is relevant and,most importantly, feasible (deliverable)?

• A platform for dialogue on concerns and practices
among RCE stakeholders;• A local resource base to support ESD work; and• A networking structure for enabling ESD in local
school and community initiatives.

2. The quality of support available for eachproject and for the RCE itself. Do we havestaff with the right profile, the resources
we need, the grants necessary to support
operations, the support of the senior leadership of each partner, an effective RCE
administrative system and a productive
promotional/engagement strategy?
3. The quality of implementation of eachproject. Are those who are delivering the
project reporting that it is working effectively or do they need implementation
support to address unexpected challenges that are emerging as they try to put it
into practice?
4. Impact is the key quality test for all our work(and the one most difficult to measure).
Here the key question is: How do we knowthat the projects that we agree are working effectively in practice (level 3) are actually having a positive impact on thoseintended to benefit from all this work, andwhat exactly is this positive impact?
In this way RCE GWS is seeking not just toassure the quality of its inputs (levels 1 and 2
above) but also the quality of its outcomes(levels 3 and 4). If we find that we are notachieving the desired outcomes at levels 3
and 4, we “backward map” to look at whatneeds to be improved in levels 1 and 2.
The philosophy here is, as Francis Baconsaid in the 17th century, “We rise to greatheights by a winding staircase”.

This allowed the evaluation team to draw on the data
reflected in the RCE portal to identify the common architecture of the RCEs that might be useful to review
through the generating of evaluative data, namely:
1. The RCE as a coordination and networking
structure for ESD;
2. The co-engaged learning activities being
undertaken and their effects;
3. The notable transformations and changing
sustainability practices;
4. The strategic focus areas and the learning
links established;
5. Support from and collaboration with the
Global RCE Service Centre; and6. A picture of the value being created by
RCE processes and activities.
The evaluation process started with the developmentof an evaluation toolkit as a hybrid instrument that, as
noted above, draws on a range of evaluation traditions
that can be adapted to differing needs and contexts.
These include: Constitutive, Appreciative and Developmental Evaluation, and Value Creation Assessment.
The start-up toolkit opens with a review of documentary evidence on how the RCE was constituted3 to begin
an unfolding review of the RCE journey. The development of a picture of how the RCE evolved (Question
1: Figure 7.2.A) is designed to provide key reference
points or a baseline around which the participants
can probe the core elements of the RCE activities andpractices.

3 The constitutive evaluation has been interpreted through different questions in different contexts.
In some evaluations the constitutive characteristics were seen as those that are defined by the RCEconcept and consist of networking, participatory governance, research and development and transformative education.

Part II

An overview of the RCE Lessons Evaluation

Constitutive
Evaluation• Baseline assessment around core RCE elements (Q.1)

Appreciative
Evaluation• Stakeholder accounts of RCE processes and projects (Q.2-5)

Development
Evaluation• Proposed ways to strengthen startegic goals (Q.2-5)

Value Creation
Assessment• Assessment of value creation through RCE activities (Q.6)
Outputs: Evaluation report, photo case study and capacity development strategy per RCE

Meta
Evaluation• Review of practices, evidence and theory of change (Q.1-6)
Outputs: Synthesis report as an executive summary with 11 evaluation reports.

Figure 7.1 Overview of the Evaluation Toolkit developed for SADC RCEs

Consequently, the evaluation is approached as a deliberative process of appreciativeinquiry with a developmental evaluation dimension designed to prompt expansionof successes, strengthening of collaborative governance, improving learning interactions and collaborative linkage into the global network of the RCE Service
Centre (Questions 2-5: Figure 7.2.B-E). The focus areas and questions in eachcase are intended to loosely frame an evaluative concern to prompt appreciative
conversations that generate evidence and developmental inferences that can bebuilt on these.
The evaluation concludes with an open-ended assessment of value creation (Question 6: Figure 7.2.F) (Wenger et al., 2011).
Wenger et al. (2011) describe how communities of practice produce value in theirwork cycles of activity. Value creation starts with a sense of something that is of
immediate value that might be seen to have a wider potential for value creation.

169

170

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

A. Constitutive overview of RCE in context

B. Appreciative review of activities and effects

Question 1: RCE Coordination & networking

Question 2: Activities & their effects

The RCE Journey: A review of how the RCE was constituted and is functioning to enable learning and change.

2.1

How has the portfolio of activities of the 		
RCEs envolved?

2.2

What have been the best/most successful RCE
activities and why?

2.3

Give examples of how successful collaboration/
decisionmaking is producing the effects that are
being achieved?

2.4

How can activities be up-scaled and mainstreamed?

2.5

How could better work be achieved?
• In the RCE? (inward looking)• In the region? (collaboration and outward 		
looking)

1.1 How did the RCE evolve?
1.2 How has the membership changed?
1.3 How are local issues being addressed?
1.4 What ESD initiatives have been undertaken?
1.5 a) What can be done to improve RCE work and b)
how?
Reference appreciative comments to the available documents: RCEapplication, articles in the RCE bulletin, RCE pulications, project
documents, other publications, audio visual materials etc.

C. Appreciative and developmental review
of processes and their impact

D. Developmental review of learning,
impact and strategy

Question 3: Transformation & sustainability

Question 4: Strategic areas & linkages

3.1

What flagship initiatives reflect the successes of
the RCE?

4.1

3.2

Summarize the scale of a) knowledge and b)
practice transformation apparent in these
initiatives over a period of 12, 24, 36 months etc.

What strategic focus areas, partnerships,
activities have been key to the successesof the RCE?

4.2

What could be done to improve learning andeffectiveness (e.g. partnerships, resourcing andscale)?

4.3

How can existing linkages, processes andprograms be strengthened?

4.4

What new strategic links and capacity
development could be explored?

3.3

What has changed and how is the change evident?

3.4

What resources and governance have enabled
success?

3.5

What, besides funding, can be done to overcome
barriers and sustain the work of the RCE?

E. Developmental review of networking practices

F. Review of value creation impact

Question 5: Global RCE Service Centre

Question 6: Value creation assessment

5.1

What have been the benefits of being acknowledged
as an RCE?

Reviewing evidence of value creation

5.2

How are you interacting with the RCE Service
Centre?

5.3

How are you working with other RCEs and what aresome of the activities, successes and challenges?

5.4

How has your RCE participated in regional andglobal RCE conferences and undertaken follow up
activities?

5.5

How could regional and global RCE activities be
improved to strengthen your RCE work?

Figure 7.2 Foci of Hybrid Evaluation

6.1

What were the most meaningful RCE activities
discussed?

6.2

What potential values are the RCE activity
producing?

6.3

What difference has this made that would not
happen otherwise?

6.4

What difference has it made to the ability of the
RCE to produce what matters through its ESD
projects?

6.5

What new understandings of what produces value
are becoming evident?

Part II

The aspiration to create value is then initiated through applied work that affirms
and creates value, often producing change that is realized in context and can involve a positive reframing of what is of value and worth achieving. Looking backinto the document record and the appreciative data, it is possible to work with theevidence to undertake an assessment of value creation in the emerging story of
the RCE as an active learning community producing value through the work thatthey do together.
The question framework of the toolkit (Questions 1-6) has been developed as
an appreciative review process to inform and to strengthen an RCE. Finally, theappreciative and developmental story, like any appraisal, can be used for reviewing
emerging ESD processes and practices across RCEs (meta evaluation). Assessmentof this wider picture of the situated practices, theories of change and evidenceof impact will be useful for understanding and refining our continuing RCE work
both in the developing context of an RCE and across the diversity that has emerged under the RCE “brand”, a new and interesting worldwide collaboration inreflexive social learning.
For such a process to unfold, the RCE community would have to facilitate capacity
development practices that provide an opportunity not only to learn evaluative
strategies but also to be able to intellectually review their foundations as well as
the power positions behindthem and the implications for employing them. As
in many areas of RCE engagement, to become another transformative process,evaluation has to be rested on learning, research, and action, undertaken as blended into a single process or feeding into each other.

Evaluation Case Study: Working with the Hybrid Evaluation
Framework in RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape
(By Rob O’Donoghue and Ndumiso Nongwe)
RCE Makana partners undertook a participatory evaluation process using
the appreciative, developmental and value creation assessment approach
outlined in the RCE EvaluationToolkit. The process reviewed the RCE asa platform for dialogue and a resource base functioning as a networking structure for enabling ESD in local school and community contexts oflearning-to-change.
The RCE Evaluation Toolkit was used over a three-day review workshop
with 12 participants in RCE Makana involved in education activities related to:
•
•
•
•
•

Water (Water for Dignity project)
Energy (St Mary’s Development and Care Centre (DCC))
Waste and sanitation (Makana Youth)
Cleaning and compost gardens (InqabaYegolide)
Education services (Albany Museum) 

cont.

171

172

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

Used in a primarily discursive review process of six stages of scaffolding questions, as outlined in the evaluation toolkit, and with a field visit
to develop case stories of situated practice, the workshop was seen
as a preliminary evaluation around which other evaluation focus areas,
instruments and strategies could be developed as increasing capacity in evaluation practice emerged.
Groups unable to attend the review process convened by Makana
Municipality as the new host of the RCE Secretariat were subsequently interviewed using the same framework tool (Cowie Catchment Campaign, Eco-Schools, Umthathi, Fundisa for Change, RU Green, and Galela
Amanzi). The interview process allowed these groups to reflect on theoutcomes of the evaluation and to provide their input into the process.
This was not ideal but was a necessary adaptive move that illustrated how
the RCE is a moving feast of partners and activities where affiliates havetended to move in and out over the years. Here it was notable that social
movements from poorer communities tended to be facilitated by moreformal structures like Makana Municipality (Makana Youth and InqabaYegolide) and the Rhodes University Water Research Institute (Water for
Dignity)
The Makana RCE was identified as a structure for collaboration where
people meet and work together or ”meet-talk-act” in a local context.
The Water Research Institute is exploring “a new paradigm of transdisciplinary research” at the interface between university researchers, civilsociety and state service institutions. These approaches were noted withappreciation as they meant that local issues could be addressed. The
following positive features were recorded in appreciative deliberations:• Beginning to communicate through water forums and by forming
cooperatives (Water for Dignity)• Supporting small gardens with composting and then seedlings(InqabaYegolide)• Hot bags being made and shared to save electricity costs (St Mary’s
DCC)• Stories of water and change-choice-practices are in the museum
education programs (Albany Museum)• Sanitation practices are changing and problems are decreasing insome areas of the municipality such as Extension 6 and Extension
10 (Makana Youth)
Appreciative Review of Context,
Coordination and Networking
The opening appreciative summaries emerge from the initial interest
group discussions to illustrate that RCE Makana is a mix of university,
NGO and municipal community-engaged projects that are independently active across civil society, youth and community service organization structures. All are funding-dependent and most focus areascont.

Part II

are reflected in the Local Environmental Action Plan (LEAP). Project
implementation, however, has been weak and uneven, although there
has been an Environmental Education and Awareness Strategy and there
is now a provision for LEAP projects within the Integrated Development
Plan (IDP) of the municipality. It was noted that some of the funding
had been allocated to projects and that the municipal councilors had
tried to establish and maintain a Makana Environmental Forum for collaboration and reporting on environmental problems and activities. This
structure has not been a regular event and has become more of a complaints space than a project development structure. The coordinationand networking has thus moved to many groups acting on their own
and with the University Community Engagement structure and other independent organizations initiating and managing projects outside a municipal services framework that is not operating effectively in most
sectors.
After the opening appreciative conversation and a scoping of the coordination and networking processes in play, the appreciative exploration
continued in relation to activities and their positive effects that could bebuilt on to strengthen what was being done by the groups participatingin the evaluation.
Review of Activities and Their Effects
This review process was once again developed around the success stories
but it probed the collaborative processes within which the learning andchange emerged and then developed to examine possible up-scaling,
mainstreaming and widening collaboration within the RCE and with otherstructures across the region. Notable here were:••••

Eco-school support – primarily gardening initiatives;
Waste communication – pilot projects at the household level;
School water materials and exhibition at the museum;An emergency water proposal being advanced by civil society andthe university’s Water Research Institute;• Identification of training priorities – LEAP and IDP;
• Health and service data collection and reporting to the municipality;and• Hot bag distribution to save money and with follow-up to provide
support to families suffering unemployment.
It was noted that working in and with small structures can be rewarding and effective but it was found to be difficult to scale up activities
to work effectively with big structures. This insight pointed to a gap where
there was a need for the training of community facilitators. A training manual, however, had been developed and a first course was being run by
the Environmental Science Department and the Community Engagement
unit of the university. At the local level, more community facilitators would
strengthen work within small initiatives emerging in support of those
cont.

173

174

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

suffering from environmental problems. It might also be possible for the
RCE to work better with the big structures of municipal governance andservice delivery. Here it was notable that whereas many initiatives werebeing undertaken and having an effect, this process could be strengthenedby the RCE operating as a more formal structure supporting collaboration and community-engaged initiatives.
The next stage of the evaluation probed emerging flagship initiatives
in more depth to assess positive transformation and processes that arestrengthening sustainability as a project impact.
Evidence of Transformationand Sustainability
At this stage the evaluation participants went on a field trip to review
flagship initiatives by developing picture narratives that would informthe evaluation process. The projects selected were:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Health and service delivery data collection (Water for Dignity)
Hot bag saving and family support services (DCC)The Umthathi SUS Garden (Makana Municipality)
Youth cleaning and composting (InqabaYegolide)
Waste awareness communication (Makana Youth)
Blue Planet Gallery water education exhibit (Albany Museum)The objective was to scope the scale of knowledge and practice transformation, and to examine how the mobilization of resources and patternsof governance might be contributing to the successes being experienced
by those involved. This was to be extended to the identification of barriers and how these might be overcome to sustain and strengthen the work
being done.
The photo narrative approach was successful to a point, particularly for
representing what was being done. This will need to be extended, withmore time allowed, to probe for in-depth data and to source wider participant accounts that can be examined in relation to patterns of resource
use and governance that are contributing to learning and change. These
questions of practice and effectiveness were probed in more depth whenstrategic areas and linkages were reviewed.
Strategic Areas and Linkages
Although it was noted that the “RCE structures enable projects to link
strategically on and around local issues” this was seldom realized andmost projects worked independently, particularly community/civil society
initiatives that tended to work directly with a particular university or municipal structure. The key outcome from the review was that “the RCEshould be formalized as a platform for key stake-holders to meet andengage around local environmental issues and initiatives”.

cont.

Part IIThe key outcome of this focus was the deliberation of a strategy forcapacity development training and to strengthen the RCE by establishinga platform for co-engaged ESD with the Makana Municipality structuresand projects working on problem-solving and change in the area.
Capacity development for community facilitators and decisionmakers in
City Hall was identified as the priority with partners who were workingto:• Get reliable data together on health and basic services;• Develop pilot projects on key interventions that reduce risk, notably 		
the idea of “one street one tank” to ensure potable water when the 		
system breaks down;• Have water forum meetings where residents will have a voice and 		
access to change practices that have immediate and tangible
benefits;• Train museum and project staff and community facilitators to support
co-engaged education initiatives; and• Expand communication and resourcing to the house-to-house
engagement of youth in problem-solving related to waste, waterand sanitation. 
RCE Makana and the Global Service Centre
The university-based RCE structure has been little more than an open
forum that has come and gone in cycles of activity and inactivity over
the years. What are needed are funds to maintain and manage the RCE
as a platform for capacity development and collaboration. The RCE has
also been too far removed from the municipal structures and has not had
the capacity to mobilize and initiate anything more than small-scale pilot
initiatives. These have been useful and have built some small-scale successstories that could now be scaled up to make an impact beyond the few
participants involved. The RCE, however, has been critical for supporting
community-based initiatives that would not have emerged or been sustained without RCE training support. It will be important to strengthen
the training support and operate in ways that are more closely tied to andbetter aligned with the municipality.	
Being recognized as an RCE initially produced some momentum in key
areas but this has not been sustained or scaled-up sufficiently. Participation in regional conferences has enabled a sharing of ideas but amore strategic platform is needed to work up wider engagements andbenefits. This evaluation report will be shared with other RCEs throughthe Global RCE Service Centre and it will also be used to bring projects
together under the municipality as the Secretariat for the RCE.

Assessment of Value Creation
The focus here was on ”what value creation would not otherwise have
happened if it was not for our initiatives”. This was not an easy matterto assess because many of the initiatives reviewed would probably have
cont.

175

176

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

happened through university programs and community engagement
initiatives or municipal project funding without an RCE that had beenan open voluntary and informal structure over the years of the DESD.
However, many of the small-scale initiatives in co-engaged innovation
would not have happened without the social learning commons project that was established within the RCE at the Environmental Learning
Research Centre.
The most meaningful activities of self-evident value to participants in theevaluation process were:• The collection and sharing of data on health issues and water
problems;• A realization that Makana Municipality had many problems to deal 		with;• That the RCE provided a platform in which small-scale communitybased projects could emerge and flourish;• The use of hot bags had high value for the electricity savings that 		
they bring;• There is a potential value in collaborative work but this is not yet 		
being realized, as projects tend to work independently;• The evaluation process gave participants support to begin to think 		
systematically about their activities; and• Projects can be drawn together in capacity development training 		within the RCE.
Overall, the review of value creation surfaced in this first round of evaluative review. The process was centred on the value that participants
were finding and sharing in their work and getting out of the evaluation
exercise. The evaluation was said to be useful for “getting around mental
roadblocks by working from what is appreciated and practically available”.
Learning and Strategic Initiatives Emerging
from the Evaluation Process
The outcomes were all drawn together into a vision for the RCE, a shared
image of tangible value in relation to the context and priorities forcapacity development and training.
Meta Evaluation
The appreciative data and the evaluative insights reported above
were consolidated and reported back to the participants at a followup meeting. A decision was made to have a further report back into the
Makana Environmental Forum with a view to more formally constitute theRCE as a civil society platform for action to scale up and expand the ESD
activities and change practices in the area.

cont.

Part II

The evaluation data revealed that whereas there were many small-scaleinitiatives that were appreciated and worth taking forward within the RCE,
the secretariat needed to be more formally operated as a civil society
structure alongside and including Makana Municipality. It was noted thatthe dominant agenda was around basic service delivery and not on social
innovation in response to the need for global change through ESD.
Most of the activities and their small-scale effects were not sufficiently
oriented to change as they were dominated by efforts to get basic
services functioning to benefit the quality of life of local people, particularly the poor and unemployed. Civil society activists have emerged,
particularly in response to the recent water crisis, and they need to continue to focus on community forums and data collection so that informed
decisions can be made with regard to service delivery and health risks.
The data thus collected would also be an important baseline for bettermeasures of change in future evaluation work.
Transformation and sustainability were not apparent beyond the small
scale and, as noted above, were mainly centred on basic service
delivery. It was felt that these must remain a priority focus area, as
people must have access to basic services to have a healthy qualityof life. However, the water, energy, health, waste and transport systems
being initiated and maintained are not likely to reduce humanimpact and bring about more sustainable options. There is a need toscale up work on alternative energy and social innovations that will bring
into effect more sustainable ways of doing things. The initiatives that offer
useful possibilities here are the use of hot bags and exploratory work on
alternative energy options that are currently being pilot tested outsideof an RCE project structure that needs to be more formally constituted.
Creative alternatives could also be more strategically introduced with
better civic participation and on a scale likely to have wider benefits andimpact, but this will require more skills training of those working in andwith civic structureslike Water for Dignity community forums. Capacity
development training was thus identified as a top priority that could be
extended to include capacity in evaluation practices.
Much of the appreciative evaluative discussion and strategic direction
reflected above emerged in the review of value creation within and throughthe RCE. Here it was noted that courses on community facilitation andevaluation could be developed so that the use of evaluation tools
becomes part of all projects and civic engagement activities.
The next stage of the Makana evaluation process will be a report backinto the Makana Environmental Forum with a view to formalizing the RCE
as a civil society projects platform.


177

178

Chapter 7 Enhancing Monitoring and Evaluation Practices in RCEs

Conclusion
The above case record and follow-up of the initial deliberative evaluation by community project partners in RCE Makana reflects how it is possible to draw on
key features of evaluation discursive practice to produce an evaluation frameworkfor participatory review of an RCE as a collaborative process of co-engaged social
learning. The evaluation had high local relevance and was a step towards capacity
development to access the evaluation literature to conduct more focused evaluative
review of and research on RCEs. Overall, the experience of conducting a structured, collaborative review was a useful process for moving into an evaluative
approach to continuing work.

References
Blamey, A. & Mackenzie, M. (2007). Theories ofchange and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod orapples and oranges? Evaluation, 13 (4), 439-455.
Coghlan, A., Preskill, H. & Tzavaras, T. (2003). An
overview of appreciative inquiry in evaluation.
New Directions for Evaluation, No.100, Winter 2003.
Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B. & Weiss,
C. H. (1995). New approaches to evaluating community
initiatives, Vol. 1: Concepts, methods and contexts.
Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D. & Stavros, J.M.
(2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook (2nd ed.)Brunswick, OH: Crown Custom Publishing.
Gamble, J. A. (2008). A developmental evaluation
primer. Canada: The J.W. McConnell Family
Foundation.
Mader, C. (2013).Sustainability process assessment
on transformative potentials: The Graz model for
integrative development. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 49, 54-63.

Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation.
London: Sage.
Preskill, H. & Catsambas, T. (2006). Reframing
evaluation through appreciative enquiry. New York:
Sage.
Rivers, N. (2014). Summary report on methodology
used to construct value-creation stories. Project Report.
Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes
University.
Wenger, E., Trayner, B. & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities andnetworks: A conceptual framework. Rapport 18, Ruudde Moor Centrum, Open University of the Netherlands.
Ed. Note: In addition to the references cited in the text,
we have added some useful references on evaluation in
the list above.

Part II

179

180

Part III RCEs: The Prospect

Part IIIRCEs: The Prospect

As the world looks beyond 2014, UNU and ESD stakeholders recognize
the distinctive ability of RCEs to respond to global systems in crisis, and also their moral responsibility to act on issues of sustainability well beyond the end of the DESD. Part III looks forward, learningfrom the challenges of the past and present, going beyond the Decade
towards the implementation of the GAP (Chapter 8) and alliances withother sustainability processes (Chapter 11), and addressing how the RCEcommunity can contribute and offer future perspectives from the decadelong learning and experiences of RCEs. However, while looking into
the future it is important to reflect on the past and recognize that theRCE initiative has parallels in history with the rise of contemporary
humanism and modern science. Chapter 10 offers a grand narrative of
RCE development in the context of long-term changes in global knowledge systems.
Contributions to both Parts II and III demonstrate the interplay of unityand diversity in the RCE network. With chapters written by representatives

181of different communities and organizations, a colourful variety of cultures and approaches in promoting ESD worldwide comes to life. At thesame time, the chapters demonstrate common tendencies and emerging
qualities in spite of different cultural-social-economic contexts, stakeholders and action areas. A variety of practices and aspirations for the future are shared by RCEs from different continents in Chapter 9, presenting a collective outlook of the future along the lines consistent with the
Tongyeong Declaration, which affirms the commitment of RCEs to “implementing strategic actions that build a global learning space on ESD”.
There is no one way forward; there are multiple pathways ahead and theRCE community works with partners across the globe in anticipating thefuture of the RCE movement from various perspectives. Chapter 11 broadly
explores the possible future directions for the development of the RCEcommunity, and the pathways for addressing challenges for increasing
the RCE potential.

182

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		Part III

Chapter 8Contribution of the RCE Community to
the Global Action Programme on ESD:
Some Reflections

Mario Tabucanon, Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana,
Kiran Banga Chhokar, Abel Barasa Atiti and Zinaida Fadeeva

The Global Action Programme (GAP) on ESD is a follow-up to the DESD after
2014. Building on the successes of and lessons learned from the DESD, thegoal is to generate and scale up action at all levels and in all areas of educationand learning in order to accelerate progress towards sustainable development.
The objectives are two-fold: to re-orient education and learning so that everyone has the opportunity to acquire the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes
that empower them to contribute to sustainable development; and to strengthen education and learning in all agendas, programs and activities that promotesustainable development.

183

184

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections		In order to enable strategic focus and stakeholder commitment, GAP has identified five priority action areas as key leverage points to advance the ESD agenda.
These are:
1. Policy support: Integrate ESD into international and national
policies in education and sustainable development.
2. Whole-institution approaches: Promote whole-institution
approaches to ESD at all levels and in all settings.
3. Educators: Strengthen the capacity of educators, trainers andother change agents to become learning facilitators for ESD.
4. Youth: Support youth in their role as change agents forsustainable development through ESD.
5. Local communities: Accelerate the search for sustainable
development solutions at the local level through ESD.
GAP is expected to be implemented at the international, regional, subregional,
national, subnational and local levels. All relevant stakeholders are encouraged
to develop activities and commitments of key partners are solicited under eachpriority action area. Individual RCEs and the global network of RCEs are in astrong position to commit to GAP implementation in all priority areas.
At the time of writing this book, GAP’s strategy of implementation has been centred on the global governance mechanisms of the program. Drawing on this work,
this chapter identifies areas and actions where RCEs can make significant contributions to GAP implementation. The reflections are informed by a survey conducted by the Global RCE Service Centre in which RCEs across the world sharedviews and opinions regarding the value-added roles of RCEs in engaging witheach priority area1, and the possibilities for actions towards up-scaling and mainstreaming. The chapter also highlights already demonstrated achievements andchallenges to be overcome to pave the way for a more robust Global RCE Network
in its quest to advance the ESD agenda.
Inputs from the following RCEs are gratefully acknowledged and are referenced
in the chapter:
Africa: RCEs Buea, Kakamega, Kano, KwaZulu Natal, Greater Nairobi, Greater
Pwani, Lesotho, Maputo, Minna, Nyanza, Swaziland, Western Nigeria, Zambia
and Zomba;
Americas: RCEs Bogota, Greater Portland, Guatemala, Lima-Callao, Saskatchewan and Western Jalisco;Asia-Pacific: RCEs Bohol, Delhi, Goa, Greater Phnom Penh, Greater Western
Sydney, Guwahati, Penang, Pune, Tongyeong, Waikato, and Yogyakarta; andEurope: RCEs Euroregion-Tyrol, Lithuania, Middle Albania, Munich, NizhnyNovgorod, Rhine-Meuse, Severn, and the consortium of RCEs in Germany.2
1 GAP’s priority areas have been interpreted from the perspective of individual RCEs and the RCEcommunity as a whole. As GAP terminology and concepts are still evolving, the editors hope thatreflections of this chapter will contribute to further shaping of the GAP.
2 Reference to RCE inputs does not present an exhaustive picture of activities of these RCEs nor thatof the whole RCE community.

Part IIIThe strategic objective of the Policy Support priority action area of GAP is to inte- Policy Support
grate ESD into international and national policies in education and development.
An enabling policy environment is crucial for education and learning for sustainable development and for the scaling up of ESD action in formal, non-formal
and informal education and learning. Relevant and coherent policies should begrounded in participatory processes and designed through inter-ministerial andintersectoral coordination, also involving civil society, the private sector, academia
and local communities.
According to the GAP, creating an enabling policy environment linked properly to
implementation requires, in particular, systematic integration of ESD into:• Sectoral or sub-sectoral education policies at the national level and also as animportant element of international education agendas;• Policies relevant to key sustainable development challenges at the national
level, and into relevant international agendas in sustainable development; and• Bilateral and multilateral development cooperation frameworks.
ESD and Policy Processes: Opportunities for engagement
As described in Chapter 6, there may be two distinct thrusts in policy process intervention, namely, the integration of ESD issues and skills into relevant education
policies, and into policies relevant to sustainable development. It is also important to recognize that engagement with policies can be done along several entry
points in the policy cycle: problem definition, policy objectives and options (policy
framing), policy implementation (change management), and policy evaluation.
These roles may occur at various levels – organizational, local, national, regional(multinational), and global – and global-local alignments are important anddesirable.
By virtue of their constitutive character, RCEs have contributed to policy processes
by providing platforms for policy dialogues, serving as a policy support base (e.g.
policy research and providing expert opinion), and influencing policy throughdemonstration of good practices. ESD and SD capacity development is a major
thrust in the functioning of RCEs; it behooves the RCE community to cultivate
these vast opportunities into the future. As demonstrated in the following sections, in the context of GAP on ESD implementation, RCEs can add value to SD
policy processesat virtually all stages of policy development.
Facilitating Networking and Creating Alliances
Value additions derived from RCE interventions in ESD and SD policy processes
are evident in RCE actions. RCEs are already seen as contributors to developmentof national ESD strategies (e.g. RCE Greater Nairobi, RCE Zambia), and serve as
platforms that bring together relevant actors to participate in designing and establishing ESD policies and policy evaluation system (e.g. RCE Buea). The aim is tointegrate ESD systematically into education policies that cover the whole of theeducation sector or parts of it.

185

186

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		Specific achievements of RCEs are demonstrated in networking and building linkages with stakeholders – government and non-government – in advancing ESD(e.g. RCE Delhi) and in facilitating activities and projects that enable members
to work towards the goal and objectives of national environmental education and
ESD policies (e.g. RCEs Lesotho, Bohol, Yogyakarta). These included, inter alia,
participation in developing ESD strategies and pursuit of ESD objectives for thecountry (e.g. RCEs Pwani, Greater Nairobi), lobbying for the formulation of ESD
action plans, and fundraising for and guiding the implementation of ESD activities. Policy consultation meetings and policy-practice dialogues among multisector stakeholders were held by RCEs Greater Nairobi, KwaZulu Natal and Yogyakarta (as illustrated in Chapter 6), policy review and analysis were conducted by
RCEs Goa and Saskatchewan (ibid.), and participation in relevant local Agenda 21
processes and collaborative work with the local government has been demonstrated by RCE Munich.
Development of Policy Research
Another way of contributing to the policy process is through policy research. Thisis illustrated in Chapter 6 by the experience of RCE Saskatchewan where themember higher education institutions were involved in providing analyses andrecommendations on an energy issue to the provincial government. As several
RCEs are led by higher education institutions (HEIs), and as all have at least one
HEI as a member, they are well placed to ensure that policymaking is based,among other inputs, on process informed by science.
Participation in Policymaking at the Regional and Local Levels
National policies are expected to trickle down to the level of local governance andorganizational policies. Many initiatives of RCEs centre on policy influence inorganizations, including those of RCE stakeholders. These aspects are elaborated
in the GAP priority action area on whole-institution approach (see next section inthis chapter). RCEs assist in ESD programs and initiatives and projects are shaped
into education contexts (e.g. RCE Waikato) in partnership with local governmentand other local multistakeholders (e.g. RCE Munich).
Some important examples of RCEs working with local stakeholders with regard topolicy formulation and implementation are attributed to schools. Successful implementation of ESD policy in schools depends greatly on the commitment, effort
and the level of enthusiasm of the school leadership and teachers. Eco-schools
are committed to investing effort, enthusiasm and creativity in finding ways tocontinuously improve the inculcation of a culture of caring for the environment,
society and economy. Many RCE initiatives, for example those of RCEs Zambia
and Guwahati, centre on policy influence for eco-schools in terms of a vision andmission that reflect the ESD culture of concern for the environment, enhance thedevelopment of human resources in terms of skills and in ESD, and support aclean and healthy school environment with efficient utilization of resources.
Advocacy
A direct value-added contribution to policy processes is in SD policy development
and implementation (e.g. RCEs Pwani, KwaZulu Natal, Bohol, Yogyakarta, Guwahati, Greater Western Sydney). RCEs provide a platform for SD policy dialogue,
where stakeholders from government can articulate SD issues and learning from

Part IIIRCE initiatives (e.g. RCEs Zomba, Buea, Zambia, Munich). Policy research, including designing and proposing new strategies for SD policy processes, collaborationand implementation (e.g. RCEs Saskatchewan, Buea, Goa), are areas where RCE interventions can have pronounced impacts. It is important to also recognize the advocacy role of RCEs for more holistic approaches in SD policymaking, more governmental commitment, and practical involvement (e.g. RCE Buea). Finding and reporting unsustainable practices for the purpose of self-compliance of ESD and SD
ethos are actions that RCEs can contribute (e.g. RCE Kano). These are areas where
ESD can be systematically integrated into policies relevant to key sustainable development challenges.
Aligning Local and Global Policy Processes
The Ubuntu Alliance, through the Ubuntu Committee of Peers for RCEs, supports
the global RCE movement, provides direction, and recommends policies for theeffective functioning of RCEs. Through the participation of RCEs in national andinternational sustainability processes (in partnership with national governments,
UN agencies and international organizations respectively), their role in integrating
ESD as a component of international bilateral and multilateral agreements canbe enhanced. These agreements are expected to be aligned with national development plans and priorities, and when development of national plans embraces
ESD and SD issues, it becomes possible for these international agreements toalso include sustainability concerns. Through the influence of RCEs in national
development processes, the contributions of the RCE community in aligning local
and global policy processes are enhanced.
The Way Forward
Looking forward, various perceived challenges for more effective impact on policy
processes need to be overcome, although to different degrees across RCEs. Prominent challenges include the inability of stakeholders to see the whole policy picture
and the lack of understanding, awareness and strategic focus on the processes ofpolicy engagement. These critical issues need to be addressed in a manner whereby local stakeholders, assuming shared responsibilities and working together, areempowered and become committed to contributing to policymaking processes andsuccessful implementation. It is imperative to scale up actions called for by GAP
based on experiences gained during the DESD; the process necessitates involvement of policymakers. It is incumbent upon UNESCO and its partner UN agencies, including UNU, to exercise their important functions in facilitating implementation, monitoring progress and serving as a clearinghouse of key actors andsuccessful practices of policymaking and implementation.
Whole-institution approaches are based on the premise that change towards sus- Whole-Institution
tainability can only occur if all levels and contexts within an institution are aligned Approaches
in their efforts to implement policies and practices on ESD (Ferreira, Ryan & Tilbury, 2006). The GAP priority area on whole-institution approaches to ESD requires the re-orientation of teaching content and methodology as well as of policies
and practices, and collaboration of institutions with key sustainable development
stakeholders in the community (UNESCO, 2013). Whole-institution approaches
require a systemic approach to change in order to address complex and seemingly
unconnected sustainable development challenges within institutions and beyond.

187

188

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		

Underpinning these approaches is the assumption that institutions are complex
social systems whose performance in sustainability change efforts is the productof the interaction of their parts (Doppelt, 2003).
Following UNESCO (2013) the promotion of whole-institution approaches to ESD
at all levels and in all settings requires that:
1. All stakeholders – leadership, teachers, learners, and administration – are engaged in jointly developing a vision and plan to implement ESD in the entire
institution. In other words, whole-institution approaches seek to simultaneously engage all stakeholders within an organization, as well as key external stakeholders, in aligning efforts towards agreed ESD goals.
2. Technical and financial support is provided to the institution to support its
re-orientation. Technical support may include the provision of relevant goodpractice examples, training for leadership and administration, the developmentof guidelines, as well as associated research in whole-institution approaches.
3. Existing relevant inter-institutional networks are mobilized and enhanced tofacilitate mutual support such as peer-to-peer learning on a whole-institution
approach. RCEs are well placed in meeting this requirement.
GAP’s strategic objective on whole-institution approaches seeks to build on the
successes found in the areas of higher education and secondary schools. Scaling
up and expanding these successes not only to the many as yet uncovered schools
and HEIs the world over, but also to other levels and types of education is a key
leverage point to advance ESD after 2014.
Because of their primary focus on enhancing multistakeholder engagement processes in ESD, RCEs have a distinct value-added role in promoting whole-institution approaches. The following section outlines these value-added roles, challenges
and possibilities for scale-up actions on promoting these approaches to ESD.

Box 8.1
RCE Reflections on Value-added Roles
The whole-institution approach has been introduced and popularized through the University of Swaziland’s Mainstreaming Environment and Sustainability in African Universities(MESA) Chair. On behalf of RCE Swaziland, theuniversity leads an initiative for mainstreaming
environment sustainability in the local institutions of higher education and teacher training. This has resulted in the mainstreamingof environment and sustainability across thecont.

Value-added Roles of RCEs
For the last 10 years, RCEs have been fostering partnerships and networks across knowledge and interdisciplinary boundaries through multistakeholder
engagement processes in ESD. RCEs are thus wellplaced to promote whole-institution approaches to
ESD. RCEs can optimize their role as networks ofchange agents to actively promote whole-institution
approaches through explicitly linking research, transformative learning and community engagement activities of member organizations.
Working collaboratively as envisaged within an RCE
network has the potential to build an understanding of
how each stakeholder has a role to play in promoting
whole-institution approaches. It can also enhancePart III

stakeholder commitment to and ownership of the implementation of the whole-institution approach acrossan RCE network and beyond. RCE reflections highlight value-added roles and potential achievementsof the multistakeholder engagement network in promoting whole-institution approachesto ESD (see Box
8.1).
From those RCE reflections and the requirements
put forward by UNESCO (2013), four areas in which
RCEs have distinct value-added roles to promote andimplement whole-institution approaches are synthesized as follows:
1. Mobilizing existing inter-institutional networks. RCEs
support a systemic approach to building multilevel partnerships and inter-institutional networks
that are ideal for promoting whole-institution approaches to ESD. Mobilization of exiting interinstitutional networks is central to the alignment oforganizational/institutional goals and those of the
RCE and its stakeholders. Moreover, networking
partnerships within RCEs can be used to connect
RCE members from different institutions, where
they may be working in isolation.
2. Engaging with all forms of learning. As networks
of formal, non-formal and informal education organizations, RCEs have the capacity to engage withall possibilities and forms of learning and education with regard to promoting whole-institution
approaches.

school curriculum and in institutions of higher
learning. (RCE Swaziland)
RCE Munich tries to influence the institutions
that provide ESD by encouraging them toconcentrate their management towards amore holistic approach to sustainability. (RCE
Munich)
RCE Lesotho has created a platform for networking and sharing of information that enables members to access information aboutfurther training, conferences and other opportunities related to ESD. Since the RCE is legally registered, it has a framework for sourcing funding for projects that can promotewhole-institution approaches. (RCE Lesotho)
RCE Bohol is instrumental in the wholeinstitution approach by sponsoring seminars
and trainings for the integration of SD in the
curriculum both in basic and tertiary education. The RCE is also mobilizing its non-formal
education institution members to integratesustainable development in their functions
and activities. (RCE Bohol)
RCE Guwahati has been engaged in demonstrating models for a whole-school approachthrough various programs such as Paryavaran
Mitra and WASH in School. RCE Guwahati ispushing the approach through teacher training programs and activity-based modules
developed for children. (RCE Guwahati)

3. Drawing upon pooled resources, capacities and expertise. Through well-defined governance and coordination mechanisms, RCEs are already pooling together resources, expertise and practices on whole-institution approaches. Thisis critical for an RCE to produce the maximum possible ESD value, greater than
the sum of what each single stakeholder could achieve in promoting whole-institution approaches without collaboration.

4. Increasing the visibility of whole-institution approaches. RCEs have communicationand networking channels at their disposal through which they can promote awhole-institution approach to ESD as a model for adaptation. The Global RCE
Service Centre has developed a communication portal (see http://www.rce-network.org/portal/home) that is very useful for increasing the visibility of wholeinstitution approaches. The portal and other channels of communication offer
RCEs opportunities for seeking support in terms of training, strategic advice orinformation on available resources, including funding opportunities.

189

190

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		Part III

Challenges
Although it is evident that RCEs are well placed to promote whole-institution
approaches to ESD, the global network still faces a number of challenges in advancing the whole-institution approach as a model for adaptation on a large scale.
One of the possible reasons is that often, activities of the RCEs have been predominantly inter-organizational in nature. Implementation of the whole-institution
model requires use of a range of strategies that target different dimensions of anorganization as a social system. Within an RCE network there has been a tendency
for a particular section of an institution to be more proactive than other sections.
As pointed out by RCE Bohol, integration of ESD into the curriculum, for example,
comes easier to those rooted in ESD, such as RCE directors, but other officials of
universities and learning institutions have to deal with concerns such as instruction and research, and internal operational problems, as well as external pressures
such as those related to standardization requirements. As a result, “ESD is given thesecond, if not the least, priority”. RCE Goa believes that it is extremely challenging
to change the mind-set of administrators and teachers to deviate from a decadesold approach with which they are comfortable, to a new
approach. Furthermore, RCEs have not developed clear
Box 8.2
frameworks for implementing whole-institutional
RCE Reflections on Scaled-up Actions
approaches that address multistakeholder engagement ESD processes.
In terms of whole-institution approaches,
RCEs engaged in similar work or projects canPossibilities for Scaled-up Actions
document and showcase experiences so thatAs highlighted in UNESCO’s GAP proposal, there isa rich database can be assimilated, sensitiveneed to scale up actions to promote whole-institution
to context and locale-specific challenges inapproaches beyond areas of higher education andorder to contribute to cross-learning andsecondary schools. As a multistakeholder learningknowledge sharing. (RCE Goa)
network, the global RCE movement is crucial in advancing the ESD agenda through promotion of wholeOne of our next steps will be to offer advaninstitution approaches. Possibilities for scale-up acced training on transformation from the pertionsare aptly captured in reflections from RCEs (Boxspective of whole-institution approaches for
8.2).
educators. (RCE Munich)
RCEs are well placed to lead the way in scaling up andexpanding whole-institution approaches in ESD. Thisis central to addressing complex and seemingly unconnected sustainable development at local and global
levels. Further provision of policy, technical support,
finances and training is required to capitalize on thestrengths and lessons learned by RCEs on scaling up
actions on whole-institution approaches. There is anurgent need to engage and enhance systemic thinking
capabilities of key change agents at all levels and in all
settings within an RCE network. This has the transformative potential of keeping them in touch with thewholeness of their existence in their RCEs and member organizations. Key RCE actors and change agentsneed to be identified with a view to forming core groups
that can drive multidimensional change at various
levels. This is important to attain commitment to and

RCEs have been advocating integrated learning development that involves learning andunderstanding knowledge advanced throughpractice. The strengths and lessons learned
can form a promising foundation for upscaling actions in learning and education.
Lessons learned and challenges faced can beshared and solutions sought from those RCEs
that have managed to address such challenges. (RCE Pwani)
Perhaps one contribution from the RCE network to the realization of GAP can be througha networked and nested collaborative actionlearning experiment on locally situated multistakeholder ESD processes. (RCE Pune)

191

192

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		ownership of whole-institution approaches across institutions. Value-added roles
and achievements in promoting whole-institution approaches provide a strong
motivation to rejuvenate RCEs in advancing the ESD agenda beyond 2014. RCEs
need to work both individually and collectively to develop and share guidelines,
tools and strategies on whole-institution approaches towards promoting the model
for widespread adoption.

Educators

The GAP proposal (UNESCO, 2013) reiterates a fundamental requirement of ESD,
namely to:Strengthen the capacity of educators, trainers and other change agents to becomelearning facilitators for ESD. Educators are one of the most important levers torealize educational change and to facilitate learning for sustainable development.
There is a continuous need to build the capacity of educators, as well as trainers andother change agents, regarding relevant issues related to sustainable development
and appropriate teaching and learning methodology.
GAP recognizes that sustainable development requires a higher level reflectionthat would lead to “changes in the way we think and act” (Annexe I, 1). To achievetransformation through education, educators must first be trained in the skills
and competences expected of their students (in formal education, training institutions, community, youth), in addition to the pedagogical skills required for the
purpose. To become competent facilitators of ESD, educators require capacitybuilding and complementary support—a meaningful and relevant curriculum,
access to appropriate teaching/learning resources, access to expertise, exposure
to emerging knowledge and innovations, access to forums for dialogue and peer
learning, exposure to and sensitization towards cultural diversity and traditional
knowledge, involvement in whole-institution initiatives, and opportunities that generate a sense of ownership of ESD. A fundamental requirement is for educators
to have the “capacity to be open to new ideas”.
Capacity Development
A primary mandate of RCEs is capacity development in ESD and SD. RCEs are
multistakeholder networks rich in expertise in a variety of fields that can contributeto ESD, anchored, as they often are, by institutions of higher education, and locallygrounded while situated within a global learning space. As such, RCEs are well
suited to provide the necessary support to educators of all kinds – school teachers,
teachers in the higher education sector, trainers and master trainers, community
leaders, youth leaders and other change agents. As RCE Severn points out:
The RCEs are an example of a network that has been strengthened and expanded asa platform for cross-boundary social learning. The strength of the RCE network is its
flexibility and its ability to adapt to the local context and culture, and to truly engage
people to take action. RCEs bring together and mobilize multiple organizations that
include HEIs to address local sustainable development challenges using ESD.
Capacity development of school teachers is a service widely offered by RCEs
around the world (e.g. RCEs Lesotho, Guwahati, Delhi, Bohol, Penang, Greater
Phnom Penh, Swaziland, Greater Nairobi, Kakamega, Greater Pwani). The composition of RCEs, especially the connections between HEIs, which include teacher

Part III

193

194

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		education institutions, and schools, provide fitting forums for this activity andthe potential for an expanding reach. The role of RCEs is further enhanced by
the collectivity of knowledge, skills and expertise of the network members. These
characteristics also contribute to the capability of RCEs to offer professional development to college and university teachers and to develop or help develop ESD
curricula. By incorporating educators in their programs and activities, RCEs areable to promote research and re-orientation of curriculum for various levels andsituations.
The deep engagement of the network members with the evolving understandingof ESD and of the local context, encourages further enrichment and evolution of
all kinds of capacity development programs, including those for youth leaders andcommunity educators. RCE networks are thus well placed to undertake capacitybuilding, which requires constant upgrading and development. Where HEIs are
the anchors of the RCEs, self-reflection in the context of ESD often leads to professional development programs for the faculty and the development of relevant andcontextual curricula at least in some disciplines or subjects. RCE Waikato in New
Zealand offers an example of such development. Given the fundamental ethicaldilemmas of sustainable development, ESD curricula should, and often do, focus
on ethical issues to provoke reflection and critical thinking. RCE Waikato has,
however, introduced ethics for sustainability into the conventional Management
program at the University of Waikato, a network partner; and the ethics of responsibility is a cross-cutting theme across all of the RCE’s work.
As multistakeholder networks that sometimes have government agencies as constituent members, RCEs could possibly influence ESD policy at the national andsubnational levels, and leverage these links to expand their reach using government networks of institutions. RCE Guwahati engaged in policy advocacy to get
ESD concepts infused in the mainstream school curriculum of the Indian stateof Assam. Next, in partnership with the Secondary Education Board of Assam, it
developed an ESD training module for secondary school teachers in Assam, andhas trained more than 5,000 teachers in SD and ESD competences. This module,
which has the stamp of approval of the Education Board, has also been madeavailable to other member and non-member organizations that have been using
it to train teachers, thereby further expanding the reach of this capacity-building
initiative.
Innovation and Funding
Given a wide mandate and a structure unconstrained by rules and regulations thatbind formal institutions, RCEs have the freedom to be creative and innovative inthe kind of activities they undertake and in their approach to work. This approachis exemplified by RCE Rhine-Meuse’s OPEDUCA (Open Educational Areas) Project which enables people and organizations (including educational institutions,businesses and government departments) to interact in ways that promote integral learning, connecting theory, practice and experience, and leading to quality
improvement of education from primary schools up to higher education. Oneof the keys to the success of the project is the “professional upgrade of teachers’
skills, competences and real-life-learning abilities”.

Part III

Experiments and innovations require funding, which as networks the RCEs are
better equipped to leverage than individual institutions. For example, some European RCEs are currently engaged in a European Commission funded project thatseeks to develop professional development opportunities for university educators
to develop ESD competences.
These are all evolving initiatives. The needs of different kinds of educators canoften be different and call for different kinds of capacity-building and support inputs. RCE Greater Western Sydney, for its community-based project “Our Place”,
provided skills training for the diversely located community educators and identified the resources, support and kind of education required by the community
members to successfully engage in a grassroots collaborative project.
Resources to Support Educators
Access to appropriate resources helps support individual learning of the educatorsand strengthens their teaching/learning efforts. Being rooted in the region andfamiliar with the local contexts, and endowed with the expertise of its multiple
partners, RCEs are competent facilitators for the development of context-specificmaterials and tools for educators for implementing ESD in the regions that
educators help develop (e.g. RCEs Greater Nairobi,
Buea, Greater Pwani). Working across boundaries,
Box 8.3
the RCEs in southern Africa have been very active
Forums for Learningin networking, sharing and capacity-building among
themselves. They also hosted African RCEs for deIn line with the series of lectures Leitbildveloping flexible and adaptable capacity-building reNachhaltigkeit, we managed to bring 15
source materials for use in the expanding ESD workcolleges and universities as well as several
on the continent. They have also established a regionNGOs together to a lecture on sustainability.
al information system to document and disseminate
This cooperation is the first of its kind in Gerbest practices and deliver ESD to local communities.
many. The highlight of the event was Prof.
RCEs have incorporated educators in their programs
Dennis Meadows’ lecture in 2012 on theand activities, which has promoted research andoccasion of the 40th anniversary of Limits tore-orientation of curriculum at different levels. RCE
Growth. In 2013 we developed the concept
Greater Portland is involved in the Regional Equityof this cooperation further and turned it into
Atlas (https://clfuture.org/equity-atlas) project and has
the annual University Days on Eco-Social
conducted project-related training through the CoalitiMarket Economy and Sustainability (http://
on for a Liveable Future. They have also created a datawww.hochschultage.org/). On these occasibase of sustainability educators. In addition, as partons, exchange about possibilities concerningof their self-evaluation exercise, RCEs are expected tothe integration of sustainability topics into
document current good practices as well as mapping
their [educators’] teaching is playing a crucial
and collecting resources that are already being used
role. (RCE Munich)
(materials, methodologies, etc.).
Given the multiple areas of expertise covered by RCE networks and their mandateof being the regional centres of expertise in ESD, RCEs are able to provide exposure to new or different ideas and innovations, and new or different ways of thinking and acting. Lectures, conferences and seminars, in both academic and nonacademic milieux, provide educators an opportunity for ongoing learning (SeeBox 8.3) by gaining and updating knowledge, and stimulating thinking and reflection, especially in terms of the cross-curricular nature of ESD (e.g. RCEs Delhi,
Lesotho, Munich, Greater Portland).

195

196

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		

A powerful concept being translated into action is that of living laboratories for
ESD. According to Roger Petry of RCE Saskatchewan:
Many RCEs are interested in creating local living laboratories for ESD to explore newsustainable paths so that unsustainable choices made in the past may be modified
and, where needed, substituted in a way that maintains local employment and otherlivelihood opportunities and improves quality of life.
RCE Greater Western Sydney’s flagship initiative, the University of Western Sydney
Riverfarm Redevelopment, links land, food, culture and water for a range of sustainability education and research purposes is one such living laboratory. The RCE
is now scoping the potential of using this “as a site for researching the integrationof place-based sustainability in teacher education programs”.
Higher Education and Community
Institutions of higher education, in addition to teaching and research, are also
charged with the responsibility of service to society, primarily through community
outreach, which offers them the opportunity of much wider reach and influence.
This can be a valuable engagement for collaborative action-learning for educatorsand students to learn through real-life projects, and for communities to benefit
from the knowledge and professional approach of academia.
RCE Guatemala points out that the traditional relationship of higher education
with local communities has been criticized for being that of marginal activities,
unrelated to teaching and research, and of no significant benefit to the communities in solving their developmental problems. However, the philosophy, structure
and objectives of RCEs are demonstrating the potential of this engagement. In
RCE Greater Nairobi, educators have been working on a project to improve thelivelihoods of slum dwellers in the city. For the past seven years, RCE Pune has
been supporting the Participatory Budgeting process in the city, which involves
helping develop systems at the municipal authority, enhancing community participation in the process by outreach work, as well as documentation of and researchon different elements of the budget process, which is done through university
students and their educators.
The Way Forward
Despite their many value additions and achievements with regard to GAP’s priority
area 3, RCEs face several challenges. A specific challenge highlighted by RCE
Guatemala is that “in higher education the most difficult aspect to accomplish
has been the respect for cultural diversity. The prevailing educational pattern inhigher education is very Western and does not respect any other knowledge that
does not have the quality of so-called scientific rigour”.This applies not only to
Guatemala but all across the developing world, which is so rich in cultural diversity,and also to the Western world, not just with regard to the indigenous peoples, butalso increasingly with its immigration-induced changing cultural profile. A comprehensive training program for educators in the theoretical aspects associatedwith cultural diversity and community development methods, to promote respect
for the indigenous worldview and traditional knowledge of indigenous and otherpeoples, is a way forward. So is introducing intercultural debate and knowledge
dialogues at all levels of education to overcome “the wall of the so-called ’scientificPart IIIrigor’ which does not allow appreciating the knowledge of indigenous peoples
and afro-descendants”. A member of RCE Guatemala, San Carlos University, hastaken the initiative of promoting academic discussions within the university on
indigenous knowledge, and has introduced indigenous knowledge as an element
in its current curriculum. RCE Lima-Callao calls for giving a voice to local andindigenous communities in what is taught in formal education.
Other challenges faced by RCEs include a lack of a sound understanding of the
ESD concept by educators both within the university and in the community(RCE Penang), and a lack of methodological competences, like multidisciplinary,holistic and systemic thinking, cross-curricular approaches and the ability to transform ESD contents into practical learning experiences (RCEs Guwahati, Euroregion-Tyrol). Time pressure and the pressure to perform dominate within the
educational system, making it difficult for educators to implement newly-gained
approaches within their work (RCE Munich). The challenge is thus to explore
ways to integrate sustainability across the curriculum so that it becomes a part of
how teaching and learning happens in all disciplines and in all spheres. But as
RCE Penang points out, “When it comes to greening the teacher educators’ curriculum with ESD, while many teacher educators are interested and ready to design such a curriculum, the higher authority, such as the concerned Ministry, may
not be ready for it.” This calls not only for continued, strengthened and extended
capacity-building of educators but of other stakeholders and decisionmakers as
well.
Youth comprise 18 per cent of the global population, of which 87 per cent live Youthin developing countries (UNESCO, 2007). Whereas several challenges faced byyouth need to be better addressed in sustainability policies and practices, there
is also a need for creating spaces, and empowering and integrating their vision,
perspectives and vitality in such policies and practices. Most importantly, youth
are adaptive to innovative thoughts and developments and form the future agentsof sustainability, including through influencing educational processes. Therefore,“generating action among youth and supporting youth led initiatives” has been
aptly identified as one of the priority areas in the GAP Proposal. The Proposal
further states:
Youth has a high stake in shaping a better future for themselves and next generations. Moreover, youth are today increasingly drivers of the educational processes,
especially in non-formal and informal learning. There is a need for supporting youth
as change agents for sustainable development through ESD. (UNESCO, 2013)
Sustainability Challenges and YouthBeing in a state of flux, youth face several challenges of this transition from dependence to independence; compulsory education to employment; and the development of identity and citizenship. Some of these challenges include: opportunities
for appropriate education; employment corresponding to capacities and preventing outmigration; effective participation and integration in societal decisionmaking; protection from violence, abuse, and addiction; maintaining intergenerational links and cultural identity; and health-related concerns, among several others.
There are also specific challenges of girl children, young women, the differentlyabled and a number of other marginalized youth communities.

197

198

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		

A major concern is the non-participatory decisionmaking with respect to thesesustainability challenges faced by youth. Being multistakeholder platforms, RCEs
play a significant role in both recognizing concerns and empowering youth toaddress their own issues as well as the broader societal challenges of sustainability. This necessitates
Box 8.4
context-specific needs assessment as well as action
Sustainability Learning
planning. Several RCEs already have clear principles,
active youth wings, and have developed specific youth
RCE Greater Portland is facilitating the deinterventions. For example, RCE Delhi has a specificvelopment of a new Portland Public Schools
mandate of youth involvement in sustainability
Youth Network, inspired by other RCE models
practices. The YUVA Meet, an annual event conaround the world and focusing on the fourducted by the RCE, is an excellent platform throughEs: education, environment, economy andwhich the RCE has played a key role in bringing toequity. The network connects students fromgether a network of youth.
kindergartens through high schools (K-12)
across different school districts in the region,
In some RCEs, such as Greater Pwani and Kano, youth
as well as college students who receive course
even take key roles in the governance and implemencredit for working with K-12 students.
tation of RCE activities. The RCE youth community is
Currently, high school students from twoin the process of formalizing a global youth network
schools in different towns are collaborating
to guide contextual approaches and collective projects
on a presentation on food security for the
involving youth. An RCE youth framework has been
2014 Virtual Youth Conference hosted by RCE
proposed whose purpose would be to facilitate the inGrand Rapids. Another group of students
vestment and creation of societal development goals
is developing a Hands On Greater Portlandthat can be achieved by youth through sustainable deTeam in order to apply their education tovelopment projects. The projects resulting from theservice projects focused on environmental,
framework will utilize youth in ways beneficial to pareconomic and social sustainability. The RCE
ticipating youth and their surrounding communities.
believes it is essential to channel the psychoThese strategic steps clearly are an added advantage inadvancing the GAP agenda.
logical angst of learning about environmental
problems into effective actions that give ouryouth hope for the future. It therefore strives
Box 8.4 and Box 8.5 analyze specific interventions unto inspire them to engage in their communidertaken by the RCEs in networking, developing susties and offer clear opportunities for service
tainability learning, thematic areas, and policy capaand volunteering. (RCE Greater Portland)cities.
RCE Munich believes that youth, being enthusiastic, need steady partners for their search
for meaning. Commitments to justice, natureand the possibility to change something oneself are basic ideals supporting youth throughESD. The Kreisjugendring München, an umbrella organization for extracurricular education for children and youth and a member of
RCE Munich, has developed a sustainability
strategy over the past few years. A platform
is being currently developed to enable thenumerous project groups of youth (subcultures) to be involved by online communication. (RCE Munich)

Youth and Sustainability Learning
For youth to be socially responsible, ethical, environmentally conscious and culturally sensitive, it is important for them to have access to various forms oflearning. They need to also be aware of sustainability
practices from a multilevel perspective of local to global
and vice versa. It is also critical to have appropriate
pedagogical materials that impart reflexive learningand critical and holistic thinking skills.
Youth and Policy Engagement
Policy engagement is a role rarely assumed by the
youth in most communities. Policymakers do not consider youth to be competent enough for such major
engagement. This requires building of appropriate

Part IIIYUVA Meet 2011.

YUVA Meet 2011.

199

200

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		

Box 8.5
Thematic Competences
RCE Greater Nairobi: Conservation
Education
Wildlife Clubs of Kenya (WCK) provides conservation education to youth and supports
wildlife clubs through training, information
sharing and advocacy. WCK seeks to shareknowledge and stimulate interest in ESD,
especially about wildlife conservation and biodiversity. This is supported through a teachertraining program and an annual student competition on ESD best practices. WCK has
also published and distributed a number of
ESD-related materials including thematic
packs on conservation of forests, energy, water, wildlife and combating climate change.
To create awareness WCK also organizes
an annual community conservation day andsupports radio programs on environmentand youth. WCK has a mobile environmental
education outreach program for schools and
HEIs. (RCE Greater Nairobi)
RCE Guatemala: Wisdom Dialogues
Through the wisdom dialogue project, theRCE engages with the keepers of culture withinlocal communities. These include indigenous groups, youth, elders, faith organizations, artists and cultural organizations. The
basic philosophy is to promote cultural diversity and pluralism through comprehending,revitalizing and promoting good practices inMayan communities. (RCE Guatemala)
RCE Guwahati: Carbon Dialogue
RCE Guwahati, over the past six years, has
hosted more than 100 interns and volunteers
to engage in ESD activities. Constituent educational institutions direct interns/volunteers
to the RCE Secretariat, where on need-basedmatching, they are engaged in various programs in partnership with other member
organizations. A formal internship program
offered in partnership with UNU has been proposed by the RCE to engage and train youth
in ESD competences. The RCE Guwahati
Secretariat has also promoted a youth groupnamed CARBON, which is running a cyber dialogue on Facebook https://www.facebook.
com/groups/214497101982085/. (RCE Guwahati)
RCE Penang: Energy Efficiency AwarenessA project on developing awareness on energy efficiency among schoolchildren is being
run at Universiti Sains Malaysia, the leadorganization of RCE Penang. The successful implementation of the project has had
the involvement of two ministries, namely
the Education Ministry and the Ministry ofEnergy and Green Technology. A review of
the national curriculum to integrate energy
efficiency awareness across the curriculum isbeing undertaken. The project involves thetraining of more than 2,000 teachers to reachout to more than 100,000 students (youth).
Students from the Sejahtera campus work on
raising awareness among the students in theentire university. (RCE Penang)

skills and technical competences among the youth.
Some RCEs, such as Kwazulu Natal, have initiatedprograms to familiarize youth with policy processes
and policy practice linkages.
The Way Ahead
The GAP identifies youth key stakeholders and change agents in advancing ESD. They have a critical influence today in shaping non-formal as well as informal
learning processes. GAP calls for the enhancement oflearner-centred learning opportunities for youth. This
is to be done by utilizing the strengths of informationand communication technologies, and by developing
participatory skills and empowering youth to act at
multiple levels of sustainable development processes
such as local, national and global (UNESCO, 2013).
Being multistakeholder networks, RCEs have a vitalrole in advancing this agenda as outlined above. Several RCEs have evolved a clear vision and perspectives(e.g. RCE Goa, Box 8.6), and developed focused model
projects. Documenting and replicating good practices,knowledge sharing and capacity development, interRCE networking, joint RCE projects, and policy engagement are the means to achieve this goal. In thisPart III

context, the RCE youth network is developing a youth
framework for action and is identifying a few areas
for immediate action. They are prioritizing potential
focus areas, formalizing the youth network and regional nodal points. They are engaged in capacity development, creation of an active online community,
sharing stories and good practices, and active policy
engagement. They are participating in various RCE
meetings and conferences, encouraging innovations
through youth awards, networking and engaging withother multilateral and national organizations, andin RCE internship programs aligned with academic
interests on specific themes. They have also identified some key challenges, such as the long-term sustainability of the network and financial resources for
productive engagement. It is expected that a strategic
approach of the RCE youth network would help contribute to GAP and beyond.

Box 8.6
Perspectives
Youth are not only receivers of impacts/outcomes of the various sustainability interventions, nor just active facilitators of or contributors to it; they are also a connecting link forthe targeted sustainability initiatives being
driven in society for the larger public good.
RCE youth can continue to take forward theircurrent work with individual RCEs at the community/society level. They can create youth
platforms at the formal education institutes
with which they are affiliated by taking a leadrole in getting other youth involved. RCEs canthrive on this multidimensional strength toguide and facilitate the formation of a larger
youth brigade under the identified RCE
domains of work. (RCE Goa)

Priority 5 of the GAP calls for accelerating “the search for sustainable develop- Local
ment solutions at the local level through ESD”, a goal relying on developing, Communities
strengthening and expanding local multistakeholder cross-sectoral networks. It
recognizes the role of ESD in supporting multistakeholder learning and community engagement, and links the local to the global. Local authorities and governments are seen as critical partners in realizing the ambitions of Priority 5 as they
are able, among other measures, to openly support learning opportunities for all
stakeholders and facilitate the integration of ESD in formal education.
The track record of the RCEs as well as the principal characteristics of the RCEcommunity demonstrate their ability to contribute to individual priority areas of
the GAP focused on policy, whole-institution approaches, educators and youth in
the earlier sections. However, its role in accelerating search and implementationof sustainable development solutions at the local level (Priority 5) is what makes
the RCE movement particularly powerful. Having said this, one must be careful
not to assign RCEs exclusively to one or the other priority area.
Collaboration for Meaningful Learning
Through the first conceptual articulation and at each stage of development of theRCE community, the RCEs were envisioned as entities that would mobilize andup-scale sustainability of the regions through transformative learning and action
research (Chapter 1). It brought learning into sustainability processes (E to SD)
and sustainability and resilience principles into educational practices and policies(SD to E). The RCEs contribute to regional sustainable development either byaligning the vision of the stakeholders (as shared by RCE Yogyakarta, Indonesia)
or by promoting work around stakeholders’ areas of interest while searching foropportunities to synergistic actions (as shared by RCE Goa). They have been aplatform for dialogue on concerns and practices among RCE stakeholders, a local
resource base to support ESD work, and a networking structure for enabling ESD

201

202

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		in local educational and community initiatives. In some regions, work of the RCEs
has been focused on development of a community of practice leading to change.
The learning community character of the RCEs lends itself to aspirations towards
meaningful and relevant learning articulated by the GAP. Through reflexive experimentation and change practices, and by assessing directions of learning andcharting new trajectories, RCEs help organizations and people in the communities
to understand ongoing processes while serving as living laboratories for change(Box 8.7). Information shared by the partners of individual RCEs and between
RCEs, according to RCE Bogota, helps “empower
communities to take appropriate decisions in relation
Box 8.7
to their … problems and allow[s] them to change their
Changing Ways of Thinking and Actingroles as mere observers to actors in the constructi(By Roger Petry, RCE Saskatchewan)
on of [their] own reality”. Processes of engagement,
technical assistance and knowledge-sharing opporAs noted in the GAP proposal, SD requires
tunities “move ideas into fruition, without top-down
higher-level reflection that leads to “changes
approaches of management, or charity” (RCE Greaterin the way we think and act” (Annexe I, 1).
Portland).
This higher-level reflection, however, needs
to be thought of both individually and collecAligning Learning and Action
tively. For a community to reflect at this level,
As has been asserted earlier, the multisectoral, transespecially regarding pressing sustainability
disciplinary character of RCEs lends itself not only
issues of the day (which force often difficult
to information exchange but also to the alignment
reflections on the current degradation of sysof learning and action. From the perspective of RCEtems providing long-term support for such
Lithuania:
communities), requires new institutional andorganizational structures. RCEs can usefully
A multistakeholder approach in the context of RCEs
play this role by acting as catalysts for suchmeans not only cross-sectoral or integrative approaches
reflection. With the expertise their members
in exploring particular sustainability questions, but
gradually accumulate, RCEs can create pointalso a rational interplay between research (by involed and strategic educational interventions in
vement of higher education institutions), practice, andlocal communities and regions where a regipublic interest leading to transformative innovation
on is at a critical juncture in its development… the “citizenship triangle”, i.e. education-researchpath. An RCE can capitalize on opportunities
community is emerging together with the knowledge
that emerge within a region where systematic
triangle of studies-research-business.
patterns of unsustainable development
practice self-generate new points for critical
In such alignment of actions, the partners receive areflection at all levels. RCEs need to, in turn,unique opportunity to counteract pressure on various
identify local capacities and strengths to relearning communities to focus narrowly on limited,
flect, learn, collaborate and act on these situfrom the perspective of sustainable development,
ated experiences. At the same time, an RCE
sectoral goals. RCE Greater Western Sydney, for exshould not be purely reactive. Many RCEs areample, recognizes that in the changing financial
interested in creating local living laboratories
policies of the federal government channeling funds
for ESD to explore new sustainable paths soaway from public academic institutions, it is criticalthat unsustainable choices made in the pastthat RCEs deliver convincing outcomes (for regional
may be modified and, where needed, subdevelopment) in the core areas of higher education
stituted in a way that maintains local employ– outcomes that can be leveraged through the wholement and other livelihood opportunities and
RCE network, helping research and education be more
improves quality of life.
useful to the communities through programs and research work (as shared by RCE Buea). Many RCEs,

Part III

including Zomba, Yogyakarta and Rhine-Meuse, reflected on their own considerable strength in aligning
stakeholders from government, academia, the private
sector and NGOs to have a common vision and to workon the transformative community projects making
them innovative, intellectually reflective and politicallyrecognized.

Box 8.8
RCEs as Centres of Innovation andPractice for Sustainability Commons(By T. Pesanayi, RCE ZwaZulu Natal)
Sustainability commons were developed at
RCEs Makana, KwaZulu Natal, Swaziland,
Zomba (Malawi), Lesotho and Mutare (Zimbabwe). These are centres of practice of
ESD through exhibiting, modeling and using
working models, among others, of energy
saving, alternative energy, heritage practice,visual art, water harvesting, sustainable andclimate-smart farming. Through value creationand more intensive networking, the RCEs cancreate more sustainability commons using
community input that can provide fora for
purposive and incidental learning. These
commons appear to work best where practitioners, researchers, interested users andadvocates work together collaboratively.

The RCE was conceived as a concept, and consequently implemented as a strategy, to re-orient education
towards sustainability as understood at the regional
level. It has been developed further to bring the learning aspect into the development agenda, thereby
becoming a regional community of practice and change. As a community it succeeded in bringing learningand action (Box 8.8), and exchanged the experiences
through various regional and global fora. Inter andintra-regional exchanges of the RCEs often play a critical role in facilitating learning and development innovations, enabling steps outside of the institutionallydesignated opportunities. RCE Saskatchewan, for example, has a regular event showcasing best sustainability projects of the region. RCE Bogota regularlyorganizes community events and workshops to give visibility to innovations. The
annual RCE Award gives global recognition to RCE projects thereby providing
visibility to local practices while inspiring creativity in others.

Mediating Local and Global
Contributions of the RCEs in the realization of the fifth priority area of GAP would
not be complete without highlighting the international dimension that RCEs
bring to the regions. RCE Lithuania asserts that connection among the RCEs andbetween the RCEs and international sustainability development processes provide mutual learning beyond the community of local
stakeholders. That signifies not only a multisectoralBox 8.9
approach but also a multicultural approach and values
Translation of Global Sustainability
clarification in regional development. “A great advanAgenda into Local Realities
tage of an RCE is that it chooses the areas and appro(By Betsan Martin, RCE Waikato)
aches appropriate to its environment and the SD priorities of where it is located – no two RCEs are exactly[There are] many global initiatives for sustainthe same” (Goolam Mohamedbhai, Advisor to African
able development, such as the work of theRCEs). As contextuality of RCE actions leads to a diverInternational Union for the Conservation ofsity in their actions, the diversity of cultural contexts
Nature, the Earth Charter and the UN engagewithin and between the RCEs becomes elevated. Suchment process for the post-2014 Sustainablerealization results, according to observations of RCEs
Development Goals (SDGs). These vast globGuatemala and Lima-Callao, in “knowledge dialogues
al aspirations can be overwhelming in scope;and respect of all systems and types of knowledge, inthe RCEs offer a global network grounded including indigenous and traditional knowledge” (RCE
local practice. The RCE network is a learning
Guatemala).
community where good practice and challenges sit alongside encouragement to innocont.

203

204

Chapter 8 Contribution of the RCE Community to the Global
Action Programme on ESD: Some Reflections

		vate in our own context. At the present scale,the RCE network has the quality of face-to-face engagement and keeps the possibility ofinteraction among RCEs. The generous andwarm-spirited interactions at regional andglobal conferences make this evident.
Belonging to the global RCE network bridges the global scope of sustainability aspirations through an interactive, inspiring global
network of practitioners, and enables local
practice to be developed in ways that arehighly contextual and globally referenced.
The universalist discourse of sustainable development must always be open to questioning from local situations. A prime example is
to make provision for the worldviews andvoices of indigenous peoples. There is a riskthat sustainable development will overwhelm
the specific qualities of indigenous knowledge,
and exclude some of its dimensions, suchas spirituality and the understanding of
human kinship with all living things. This iswhere RCEs have a role to play in keeping
alive local, grounded, practical and responsive activity that feeds into policy at nationaland global scales.

Global sustainable development processes also are
better translated into local realities when there is acommunity of partners, such as RCEs, that, throughcollaborative engagements, question universal discourses while enabling sustainability-inspired change
processes (Box 8.9).

Concluding Remarks
The ability of RCEs to bring together significant stakeholders, including policymakers and regional administrators (Chapter 6), engage across educationaland sectoral boundaries, including with traditional
knowledge holders (Chapter 3), and their ability tomediate local and global alliances (Chapters 1, 2 and6), make them significant partners in realizing thepotential of learning in the regions and local communities.
The RCE community has developed and matured
during the DESD and now provides a powerfulplatform for the mainstreaming and scaling up of
ESD after 2014, along the GAP priority areas andbeyond. With the change of international agenda andthe emergence of the SDGs, UNEP’s 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption
and Production (10FYP), green growth discourse,
and others, the RCE community needs to also transition to the next level of development to deliver its fullpotential. This will be explored in the next chaptersof the book.

References
Doppelt, B. (2003). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business,government and civil society. Sheffield: Greenleaf.
Ferreira, J., Ryan, L. & Tilbury, D. (2006).
Whole-school approaches to sustainability: A review
of models for professional development in pre-service
teacher education. Canberra: Australian Government
Department of the Environment and Heritage andthe Australian Research Institute in Education for
Sustainability (ARIES).

UNESCO (2013). Proposal for a Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development asfollow-up to the United Nations Decade of Educationfor Sustainable Development (DESD) after 2014. Paris:
UNESCO. Retrieved April 1, 2014 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002243/224368e.pdf.
UNESCO (2007). Profile of youth: Brief demographic and development profile of youth. Retrieved
October 7, 2014 from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/wyr10/Brief%20demographic.pdf

Part III

Reflections
Practitioners, observers, and others with interest in ESD are eagerly awaiting the
adoption of the Global Action Programme (GAP) on Education for Sustainable
Development during the World Conference on ESD to mark the conclusion of the UN
DESD in Japan in November 2014. As a follow-up to the DESD, GAP will focus on
strengthening ESD in five priority action areas. As key partners of UNESCO Bangkok from the very beginning of the DESD, the RCEs will once again be expected toplay an important role in implementing GAP, notably under the Partner Networksof the implementation structure, through their activities and expertise that will help
other stakeholders generate activities that support and enhance ESD.
Danilo Padilla
ESD Programme Coordinator
UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education
Bangkok, Thailand

205

206

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections andProspects for RCEs Post-2014		Part III

Chapter 9

The First 10 Years:
Reflections and Prospects
for RCEs Post-2014

Roger A. Petry, Betsan Martin, Laima Galkute, Olga Maria Bermúdez Guerrero,
Kim Smith and Detlev Lindau-Bank

From its inception, the RCEs have been a living, global experiment to advance
ESD at a regional level through innovative and appropriate learning strategies
true to the local educational context, needs and aspirations through which individual RCEs were created.
The year 2012 marked a watershed moment for RCEs when they convened at
the 7th Global RCE Conference in Tongyeong, Republic of Korea, and formulated and approved the Tongyeong Declaration. In many ways the Declaration
both built upon the journey many RCEs had thus far undertaken, and also
concretely articulated a profound set of aspirations for what was now viewed
by many as a global RCE movement. The ambitious set of goals, both as they
relate to the overall ESD outcomes and the instrumental means for achieving
them, emerged from the complex dynamics RCEs face at a regional level inadvancing ESD. In addition, there are many shared features across RCEs thatprovide a primary impetus for global inter-RCE collaboration.

207

208

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

The aspiration to collaborate across sectors and between disciplines at local, regional and global levels to generate education for sustainable development is breathtaking in scope; RCEs are inspired and demanding networks that put to work
the well-documented importance of collaboration to achieve sustainability. In thischapter many of the features of RCEs are drawn together to inform the prospects
for ESD post-2014. Knowledge and experience of practice are woven together withresearch and academic sources. The complexity of the collaborative system of
RCEs is made manageable through action on agreed projects. Collaboration generates a strong relational quality to RCE initiatives, so skills of cooperation, interpersonal communication, and time for organizational networking are important
attributes. As of August 2014, the context-specific design of RCEs has occurred
globally in nearly 130 sites during the 10 years of the DESD.
The Decade offered a major navigational course for local and global practices
in education for sustainability, and the signatures of these are recognizable
in the themes that follow. The wider challenges of climate change, global inequality and poverty, and transitions to low carbon
economies are all matters with which education
Box 9.1
must engage. The Decade sits alongside and comSustainability in an RCE Context
plements many other global initiatives for sustainable development, such as the work of the IUCN,
A brief word on the widely interpreted conthe Charter for Responsibility, the Earth Charter andcept of sustainability/sustainable developthe UN engagement process for the post-2015 SDGs.
ment is in order. In essence, sustainability
These global aspirations are very large in scope; thefor RCEs is referenced to the transformative
RCEs have a quality that is characteristic of someimperative of social, cultural, and economic
other global initiatives. Local practice contributes tosystems nested within the life supporting cathe global network, and is further resourced and given
pacity of ecosystems (Griggs et al., 2012). Suscoherence by UNU-IAS. While sustainable developtainability takes account of present and future
ment is a global scale aspiration, RCEs are designed
generations and cautions against robbing
to integrate economy and society with ecosystems infuture generations of the source of life andspecific practices.
well-being. Sustainability has been introduced into local and global discourse as a
The RCE network is a learning community where
way to address the over-exploitation of nature
good practice is born of encouragement to be creativeby traditional industrial development with thewithin each RCE’s own contexts. As experience isconsequential disruption of life support sysshared between RCEs, the RCE network builds capatems, including climate change. It is therecity for innovation, and this knowledge exchange isfore intended to chart a course of economic
greatly enhanced by regional meetings, such as thedevelopment that safeguards the integrity of
Asia-Pacific meeting or the Conference of the Ameriplanetary ecosystems.
cas, where the quality of face-to-face interaction
among RCEs brings the enjoyment and inspiration
There is recognition that the marked increaexperienced in personal meetings, trust building and
se in inequality with the concentration ofgenerous, warm-spirited interactions. This is also true
wealth in the hands of a few is analogously
at the global conferences, where the opportunity tounsustainable and inherently unjust. An idenaddress larger scale issues such as policy and researchtification of ethical principles may reduce theagain has the beneficial quality of meeting and diasusceptibility of sustainability to weak interlogue informed by global sustainability aspirations
pretations (Martin, 2014). The possibility of a(see Box 9.1).
universal principle as an ethical reference forcont.

Part III

Setting a Direction for the
Future of the RCE Movement
As we near the end of the DESD, the need for a declaration, as formally expressed in the Tongyeong Declaration, reflects the importance and value of articulating a greater self-awareness of the RCE movement.
This need is tied to the degree of maturation of the
movement to date, along with visioning about where
RCEs see themselves in relation to the sustainability
challenges their communities face, as well as theirown structural needs. The Tongyeong Declaration
provides a valuable self-understanding for RCEs withthe completion of the Decade on ESD (2005-2014)
and the unfolding of the UN’s post-decade Global Action Programme on ESD.
The Tongyeong Declaration focused on several important themes:
GovernanceOne theme examined how RCEs could improve theirgovernance systems and the quality of their actions
as RCEs. A primary strength of the RCE initiative involved giving individual RCEs the power to establish
and adapt their own governance structures as appropriate to their respective regions. Despite these diverse
structures, RCEs have recognized a shared need to devise strategies and processes to effectively relate withpartner organizations and to form new partnerships.
Partnerships
In the context of collaboration for ESD, RCEs affirmed
the importance of partnerships, both forming newcollaborative partnerships as well as strengthening
collaborations with existing partners, in order to increase their collective impact.

RCEs which also respects and upholds cultural plurality may be found in an ethics of responsibility. The notion of rights has becomea universal reference for justice, yet this may
not be adequate to meet the relational quality of collaboration and the future orientationof sustainability. Responsibility is the foundation of community; it is a value that can be
identified in all cultures, though sometimes
expressed as duty and obligation, and oftenwith an emphasis on intergenerational obligations (Sizoo, 2010). The profoundly relational aspect of responsibility can be seen in theidea that everyone is responsible because
every being is a part of others and interdependent with other humans and with all other life
forms. In slightly different form, “responseability” suggests the two aspects of accountability and responsiveness. These understandings resonate with the collaborative designof RCEs as well as with the collective and relational dynamics of their programs.
In many ways the sharing of knowledge,
practice and aspiration across sectors and cultures in education for sustainability is one of
the most powerful means to transform an orientation of self-interest into a common good.
Responsibility, or response-ability, refers to a
notion of accountability, as well as the ability
to respond. Rather than being oriented towrongs, response-ability can be oriented
to solutions in the future, to a prospective
accountability and a caution to safeguard
against unforeseeable consequences of theuse of new information or technology where
the impacts are not known for a long time
(Jonas, 1984). This is the reason that countries
like New Zealand are taking the precaution of
not allowing genetically modified organisms
or food into the country. Capability of Response to Immediate
and Systemic Crises
Building on these collaborative partnerships, RCEs
have a distinctive ability to respond to global systems
through their actions to transform systems for the
better. This ability to respond to crises includes both unanticipated adverse events
that impact a region over a short time frame along with gradual stresses impacting
a region over the long-term due to unsustainable practices.

209

210

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

Transformative Potential
The distinctive ability to respond to systems in crisis highlights the importantunderlying transformative potential of RCEs to:
1. Create transformative learning processes to develop new policies, programs
and projects for ESD that are critically informed by science and the social contexts of RCEs.
2. Create sustainable market opportunities across the economic spectrum including at the corporate and business levels, endeavouring to create inclusive andenvironmentally responsible economic initiatives, and to generate sustainable
livelihood opportunities, especially for the most marginalized. The overall impetus is to simultaneously advance human well-being and ecosystem healthintegrated into business and development goals.
3. Broadly shape culture and ethics for positive social transformation in a waythat gives all individuals the opportunity to learn the values, behaviours andlifestyles required for a sustainable future while respecting diversity.
4. Revitalize education at all levels through transformative educational projects
that promote research and innovation.
Building a Global Learning Space for ESD
The four areas of transformative potential appropriately inform a final theme of
the Declaration where RCEs act strategically to build a global learning space for
ESD. A global learning space for ESD recognizes that much learning will be embedded in specific community settings where the practices invite action and reflection, review and assessment, which make them living laboratories for ESD. At
the same time it presupposes RCEs will have the scholarly freedom and regional
resources necessary for such innovation. Analysis of the RCE experience during
the DESD and its evolving discourse provides new insights into the role of thisglobal network for understanding sustainable development and stimulating relevant learning practices towards sustainability. It is a strong belief that as a vibrant
and long-lived network, the RCE community will continue to be a thriving community of action for decades to come.
Elements of each of these five larger themes and the four transformative subthemes are explored below with particular reference to the post-Decade futurestate of RCEs.

Collaborative
Governance

Governance is the arena of decisionmaking and setting direction. It applies to the
public, private and civil society sectors, and in the case of RCEs as an example ofcollaborative governance, may cross all these sectoral boundaries.
Collaborative governance deepens legitimacy by partner involvement in decisionmaking and policy development. RCE collaborative governance is designed to
involve partners in dialogue, problem-solving and planning, which may involve
various constellations of partners: higher education, business, local government,
schools, and NGOs, among others. The governance arrangement of an RCE usually

Part IIIsits alongside existing institutional and bureaucratic systems of governance,
which may or may not have their own provisions for collaboration. Commitment
to RCE governance therefore requires an additional investment of the parties toframe goals, manage financial accountability, set objectives, and to agree on strategies and desired outcomes.
The process of engagement for an RCE venture is pre-eminently one of relationship building and therefore requires interpersonal skills to establish trust andtransparency and build a shared vision. This is not authoritarian decisionmaking
and rule-setting; rather it is a form of leadership that recognizes the expertise of
the contributing parties while being attentive to different knowledge, worldviews,
priorities and interests, with a certain willingness to modify perspectives and direction. The complexity of governance indicated here even suggests a quality ofunruliness with elements of evolving and responsive dynamics.
Governance for ESD sits in the interface of social, ecological, and economic systems and is therefore still an experimental and evolving art. The core principles
of engaging with a cross-section of academia, community agencies, local government, schools and business is a groundbreaking move in terms of crossing institutional boundaries and organizations with narrow accountabilities. It is the arenaof shared responsibility and is a dynamic, alive and evolving journey. It involves abigger crew with aptitude for the task and a willingness to accept constraints, demands, creativity and the investment of working together. Generosity, hospitality,
sharing of resources, and a regard for the common good are also helpful qualities.
These provisions support the ability to go further and achieve more than an individual or organization can do alone.
RCEs support the unique purpose and histories of constituent partners, whilebringing value-added programs through collaboration. As challenges to sustainability expose the complexity of issues and permeability of boundaries, the moreevident the need for collaboration becomes. For example, education cannot be
separated from the economy because this is the training ground for employment.
Health, poverty and housing are interconnected. Land management determines
the quality of rivers. Yet in the decisionmaking arena the ideal of collaboration may
sit in tension with partner self-interest. This may be played out in competition
for funds, in tensions between environmental and business interests, and in
short-term pragmatism over long-term sustainability. The relational aspects need
to be balanced with a realistic assessment of interests, commitment, resistanceand power dynamics. The weight of institutional influence or corporate interests
can override cultural differences, citizen organizations and community groups,
and therefore RCEs must seek to manage in the interests of all parties.
The benefits and challenges of horizontal networks also carry the risk of protracted time-consuming processes and delays in implementation, so there is an
important role for skilled facilitators who give attention to supportive contributions as well as to dissent, bringing synthesis to decisionmaking thereby leading
to action. This facilitative and coordinating role provided by key individuals in
RCEs reduces the risks of protracted processes and ineffectiveness.

211

212

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

All of these hallmarks are recognizable in the process of establishing and navigating
the implementation of an RCE. Some of the hurdles are reduced where thegroundwork of trust and working relationships are already laid. There is widespread recognition of the value and importance of collaboration, yet wariness ofthe time investment for organizations already stretched in their capacity to fulfill
the requirement of their core business. Collaboration is resource intensive inevery sense – of time, expertise, relationship development, program implementation and funding. While funders favour programs with pre-identified outcomes,
few will make a financial investment in the collaborative engagement process, letalone in ventures that have uncertain outcomes. In these cases, RCEs shine bytaking up these neglected opportunities.
Many of the characteristics of liberal democratic governance may be present acrossthe RCE global network. Different traditions of governance are also possible, suchas in indigenous forms of governance where kinship, intergenerational obligationand the authority of elders are an important reference in decisionmaking and law(Durie and Aikman, 2006).
Every RCE has the capacity to create a governance structure that is responsive tothe context and aspirations of its region (See Box 1.7 Chapter 1). As RCEs design
their own governance structures, the facilitation of the global network by UNU is asource of wider reference and creativity. UNU-IAS provides compass points froma global view, with additional resources of research and teaching, PhD programs,
and special courses. These resources highlight core attributes of governance:accountability, responsibility, monitoring and review, with innovative aspects designed to mobilize sustainable development at multiple levels (Bernstein 2014).
Resources such as these are being developed from the interface with RCE practiceand at the frontier of dialogue and documentation for guiding institutional andsocial transitions to sustainability.

Partnerships:
A Key to the Future

The Power of Networks
Looking back to the evolving RCE network, the essential question arises: Why
have RCEs proven to be such an appealing way of thinking and acting for ESD indifferent parts of the world?
Perhaps all RCE members at the start were asking themselves why the idea of an
RCE attracted and involved them, in spite of the variety of other associations, networks, coalitions and movements around. In the authors’ view, the first key idea inanswering this question seems to be the value of multistakeholder, cross-sectoral
partnerships.
The idea of mobilizing efforts of different organizations interested in formal andnon-formal ESD is the core idea of the RCE model. An RCE deliberately includes
different sectors (public, private, NGO), levels (international, regional, national,
local) and cultures. Professional/thematic and social networks are considered engines for change by RCEs worldwide. This is clear by looking at the reports of
RCEs mid-Decade in 2009 (see Box 9.2).
It should be noted that a multistakeholder approach is one of the core principles ofsustainable development: “The complexity of our work and the interdependencePart III

213

214

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014of the different sectors require identifying different stakeholders and supporting
varying methods that honour diversity and are appropriate for particular conditions. RCEs serve as a crucial cross-sector nexus or hub for groups that might not
traditionally work together, even though we function within the broader context
together” (Kim Smith, RCE Greater Portland).
Box 9.2
RCE Partnership Metaphors(Extracted from 2009 RCE Reports)
Our RCE is:• A network of creative forces (RCE Skåne,Sweden)• A rich resource pool being tapped forcommon goals (RCE Delhi, India)• An umbrella towards change (RCE
Tongyeong, South Korea)• Possibly best described by an African
proverb: ”If one wants to go quickly, one
goes alone. If one wants to go far, one
goes accompanied“ (RCE Porto Metropolitan Area, Portugal)• Like a busy bee yard (RCE Nuremberg,
Germany)• The spring field that has various kindsof sprouts and young leaves and flowers
everywhere (RCE Okayama, Japan)• A good example of educators’ cooperation (RCE Kyrgyzstan)• Like a spider in the regional web of activities related to sustainability (RCE RhineMeuse, The Netherlands)

Participation in the global RCE network and thematicgroups brings an added value to the activities of anindividual RCE. “We believe that RCEs can contribute effectively to implementing the proposed Global
Action Programme because of its organization in a
network which facilitates the coordination of joint
programs among several RCEs that share common
interests and goals” (Olga María Bermúdez, RCE Bogotá). Networking provides a possibility of benchmarking for mutual learning and developing of RCEs. It
is important for exchanging experiences in national/
local policy development and specific activities, suchas using traditional knowledge or developing quality
assurance in higher education.
Networking facilitates the integration of an international dimension into an RCE’s local activities, facilitating transfer of knowledge, practical experiences
and worldviews into national and local contexts. Consequently, “exchanges between RCEs could also lift
regional issues on the international agenda” (Thomas
Schwab, RCE Munich), and allow RCEs to be part ofprocesses coordinated by UN agencies worldwide. Ina broader scope, it means an emerging multicultural
approach in the activities of RCEs and critical opportunity to clarify values for sustainable development
issues.

The involvement of different actors and interests seems to be an essential factor fora holistic approach in investigating the complexity of processes in contemporarysocieties, for multistakeholder decisionmaking as well as for achieving synergy
in actions and intercultural understanding. At the same time, the dynamics of
RCE activities suppose the role of partnerships not only for specific projects, butalso for rethinking the role and methodology of ESD and sustainability science aswell as the criteria for project evaluation.
The potential of partnerships is important also for facilitating interconnection in
implementing the GAP priority areas: achieving policy support on different levels
might be essential for the other four priorities; qualification of educators is closely
related with a whole institution approach; educators and youth are driving forces
for creating sustainable local communities, etc. Looking further, a rational synergyof the GAP priorities could be seen as a precondition of transformative up-scaling.
It is also important to facilitate connections between different levels of education

Part IIIand between different forms of education (formal
and non-formal) in implementing the GAP priorities on whole-institution approaches, qualificationof educators, and youth. For example, universities
of applied sciences may be encouraged to support
technical vocational education and training (TVET)at the secondary level; cooperation of classical universities with universities of applied sciences could facilitate their research component. Ultimately it is throughpartnerships that RCEs can efficiently achieve a varietyof aims (see Box 9.3).
Partnerships with Higher Education
A multistakeholder approach in the context of RCEs
means not only cross-sectoral and integrative approaches in exploring particular sustainability questions; it also provides interplay, through the involvement of higher education institutions (HEIs), among
research, practice and public/community interest, inturn leading to transformative innovation. It is a winwin situation for HEIs by strengthening their integration of studies and research into developmental processes, as well as for business and local communities
by developing their intellectual potential for technological and social innovation.
Note that in this process the social sciences andhumanities are as valued as the natural and appliedsciences and technologies, particularly with the shift
from discipline-based to problem-based studies andresearch. In this context, a key notion of Agenda 21(UN, 1992, para 35.10) is still relevant, namely, that:
Social processes are subject to multiple variations
across time and space, regions and culture. They both
affect and are influenced by changing environmental
conditions. Human factors are key driving forces inthese intricate sets of relationships and exert their influence directly on global change. Therefore, study ofthe human dimensions of the causes and consequencesof environmental change and of more sustainable development paths is essential.

Box 9.3
Efficient Partnerships
Partnerships are established and efficiently
used by RCEs for different aims, as exemplified by several RCEs:
RCE Munich: “It is possible to develop an
open environment which allows ESD activities
to prosper through frequent exchanges with[an RCE‘s] stakeholders, and communication
with administration and politics. RCE Munich
is a neutral meeting point for networking andmultistakeholder exchanges, and also an incubator for project groups and project work.”(T. Schwab)
RCE Guwahati: “Engaging and educating
local communities has been a priority areaof RCE Guwahati‘s programs over the years.
RCE partners are bringing in expertise ofhandling different stakeholder groups. The
competencies needed to handle a livelihoodfocused program or a school-focused program
are different. Partners bring in expertise required for diversified activities.” (S. Kalita)
Southern African RCEs: “Through value creation and more intensive networking, RCEs
can create more sustainability commonsusing community input that can provide forpurposive and incidental learning. These
commons appear to work best where practitioners, researchers, interested users and advocates work collaboratively together.”(T. Pesanayi)

RCEs bring together experts on these human dimensions, within their social andgeographic contexts, to understand the root causes underlying unsustainablehuman activities, to inform the goals of sustainable development and well-beingat regional levels, and to address these challenges, individually and collectively.
For example, RCE Greater Portland has put a particular emphasis on social sustainability, asking its community to consider core questions related to social justice and equity.

215

216

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

RCEs are well positioned to champion such multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research processes because they can draw on professionals and practitioners
across disciplines and ways of knowing, with a key focus on sustainability learningand action.
Through RCEs, universities can facilitate the development of a plurality of positions and strategies, democratize access to knowledge by strengthening relations
with NGOs and community-based organizations, and provide expertise and advice
in decisionmaking. For example, the People’s Sustainability Treaty on Higher Education (UN Conference on SD, 2012) provides guidelines for HEIs in terms of eight
principles. The last principle, “sustainable development as a whole-of-institutioncommitment” (which is also reflected in the GAP) could be considered as a major
precondition in the HEI acting as a principle agent for societal transformation.
RCEs could also contribute significantly in defining and evaluating the academic
quality of HEIs in relation to ESD. According to the UNESCO definition of academic
quality: “Quality in higher education is a multi-dimensional, multilevel and dynamic
concept that relates to the contextual settings of an educational model, to the institutional mission and objectives, as well as to specific standards within a given
system, institution, programme, or discipline” (UNESCO-CEPES, 2007, p.70).
Representing different stakeholders and initiating public debate, RCEs can provide
incentives for rethinking the mission and actions of member universities, as well
as discussing qualitative indicators for evaluating sustainable developmental goals.
Partnerships with Secondary Education and TVET
RCEs can help address challenges in advancing ESD within secondary schools andvocational training. For example, ESD is frequently missing within vocational training or only minimally found in curricula frameworks. Hence the basic questionand challenge is to see how ESD can be implemented in professional curriculaand school-based curriculum.
School culture and profession-oriented curricula often pose a difficulty for the inclusion of ESD content in the classroom. Concerns are raised about how to assess
the technical and interdisciplinary skills of students related to ESD and to what
extent the needs of potential future employees are covered within the frameworkof ESD. However, the challenges of doing this assessment do not undermine theneed for this type of education. In many ways, ESD provides a vehicle for building
students’ innovation and entrepreneurial capacities. This can be especially valuable
in engaging students who do not respond to traditional ways of teaching withlearning and performance issues.
Methodological approaches for ESD are also often neglected in professional
education. These approaches presuppose an interactive use of media and tools,
along with interaction within heterogeneous groups and possibilities for independent action. Methodologies need to be action-oriented and student-centred toallow a high level of self-initiated participation by students. The challenge is totrain teachers to be able to teach key ESD competencies with appropriate teaching
methods while practicing and training occur in situated contexts or on the job.

Part III

RCEs, as local and regional multistakeholder networks, can provide a wide range of learning opportunities to support schools and TVET. This is especially the case in developing and adapting ESD-based
school curricula to be state of the art in terms of global
ESD research and discourse. Teachers can also be
supported by RCEs in adapting their teaching to students’ learning styles (especially students with special
needs) to achieve learning outcomes for sustainability
that increase sustainable forms of employment,
entrepreneurialism and lifestyles. Issues of sustainable development should be prepared and organized
in a methodical way such that students can make aconnection between their daily habits and lifestyles,
their professional training, and global sustainability
challenges. An important inter-RCE example demonstrating strategies RCEs employ to collectively addresscritical challenges of improving quality of vocational
education is found in Box 9.4.

RCEs Responding to Immediate
and Systemic Crises
As an initiative of UNU and originating under the
DESD, RCEs have a distinct ability to respond to global
systems in crisis. This is due to RCEs providing a uniquecapacity for relationship building at various organizational and geographic scales, whether throughlocal and regional initiatives or inter-regional partnerships outlined above. Their connection to the UN
system means that RCEs are able to access global
research and knowledge on particular sustainability
issues generated through the UN and its agencies, inaddition to global higher education organizations (seeChapter 10). RCEs also indirectly assume the institutional authority associated with implementing the various
UN commitments to SD and ESD within their regions.

Box 9.4
Education for All: Improving thequality of vocational education
This inter-RCE process seeks to improve thequality of vocational education by building
on principles of ESD and creating betterlabour market conditions. It is focused onschools and curricula development throughthe establishment and/or redesign of flagshipvocational education and training institutions
in different countries of Europe and Africa,
based on specific local needs. It includes
elements of teacher training that empower
educators to facilitate development of vocational education and training programs basedon existing good practices. It also aims at establishing action research to develop methodologies that enable grassroots and otherlocal initiatives in regions around the world todesign and develop needs-based vocational education and training institutions. The
project aspires to redesign the structure andinfrastructure of vocational education by integrating marginalized groups and giving
entrepreneurial skills to young people andvulnerable groups to increase job security.
Capacity development for these new initiatives in vocational education and training will
be secured through collaboration across theRCE community thereby creating a worldwide
network of interrelated helping organizations. RCEs from Kenya, Nigeria, Bangladesh,
Germany, and the Netherlands are currentlyaligning their actions to formulate project
strategies and to advance fundraising efforts.


RCEs also have the legitimacy associated with the regional and local organizations
with which they are affiliated, including regional and local governmental authorities,
higher education and school partners, and other NGOs. These long-term relationships build trust and enable RCEs to transcend traditional disputes between
governments and other economic and organizational sectors that may prevent
inter-regional collaboration due to competition and organizational limitations.
The governance structures of RCEs bring different groups to the same table in a
way that is uncommon in many places and systems.

217

218

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections andProspects for RCEs Post-2014		Part III

When reflecting on global systems in crisis, whether ecological, social, or economic, it is important to think of the capacities RCEs provide to their respective
regions and national and global organizations to respond to adverse shocks andstresses at various scales. RCEs can play a critical role in facilitating communication and collaboration, thus creating resilience at both regional and global levelsin the face of unsustainable human activities, livelihood patterns and use of inappropriate technologies. RCEs, within their own region, can work with local
communities to identify and measure what is occurring, publicize the adverse
consequences over the long-term if alternative methods are not employed, andoffer research solutions.
RCEs can also formulate new livelihood practices. This can include identifying
traditional knowledge of earlier sustainable practices that could be reintroduced,
as well as pioneering new livelihood practices through active engagement of local
RCE partners and community members. Often the inability to alter a practicestems from complex social systems and relationships, especially those associatedwith power imbalances and lack of long-term organizational accountability for
degradation of environmental resources and quality of life. In this case RCEs areable to foster dialogue and engage in broad popular education, creating politicaland economic space for organizational actors to move to alternative livelihood patterns and land uses. At the same time, RCEs can assist organizations in adopting
policies to increase accountability and/or create new regional organizations to implement initiatives, thereby addressing potential policy inertia and citizen passivity. Depending on unique regional needs, RCEs can identify experts and shareboth codified and tacit knowledge within and between regions.
In the case of responding to shocks (natural or social) that impact a community
suddenly in the short-term, RCEs could offer informed, timely, and comprehensive
intervention strategies to avoid a significant drop in community productive capacity and individual well-being. When one is dealing with unanticipated events forwhich communities are ill prepared or events of such a magnitude that previous
preparations are inadequate and overwhelmed, the social capital found in the networks inherent within an RCE is indispensable. In this case RCEs will be able tocreatively mobilize a multisectoral response to such crises. Their positions of trustin the community and pre-established inter-organizational and individual relationships would be critical in times of social breakdown, collective paralysis, andindividual opportunism common in disaster situations. In order to avoid exacerbating adverse conditions, RCEs can help increase awareness of critical social andecological dimensions of the problems being addressed and transform disasters
into important learning opportunities that allow communities to rebuild using
more sustainable building practices and reduce exposure to future risks.
While natural and social disasters may be rare in a given region, the likelihood ofsuch events occurring somewhere on the planet is a regular occurrence. This means
that, over time, RCEs experiencing disasters are able to share their experiences
through the global RCE network. This occurred, for example, with the 2011 Tohoku
earthquake and tsunami in Japan, which had significant adverse impacts on the
Sendai region. RCE Greater Sendai was able to share stories and lessons from thisregion through the global RCE network. Given such shared knowledge and thepolitical connectedness of RCEs to governments, businesses and NGOs, including

219

220

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

international bodies such as the UN, RCEs can play a growing role in lobbying forstrategic interventions in relation to disasters as well as appropriate educational
responses.
In some cases these shocks may be addressable through the ability to put out
a rapid call through the global RCE network for shared scientific expertise andknowledge (such as dealing with unexpected shocks to ecosystems impacting foodsecurity and livelihoods). Because most RCEs are structured so as to take advantage
of unanticipated opportunities that emerge over the short-term in their regions,this makes them adept at mobilization in response to disasters.
Lastly, RCEs provide a platform for developing shared global concern in relation
to regional shocks and disasters. Such empathy occurs because RCE participants
intentionally engage with each other, across regions and over time, thereby developing a deeper understanding of what a natural disaster actually means for aregion and its inhabitants. Even the ability of RCEs to express heartfelt sympathy
for other regions in crisis or offer friendly good wishes for their recovery may havea much greater impact in creating a global culture of care than is otherwise anticipated. The self-understanding as a global family of RCEs, with a shared global
destiny, further reinforces this shared culture of caring and mutual assistance.

Transformative
Potential of RCEs

As identified earlier, RCEs have significant tranformative potential in four areas,
namely, policy leadership, creating sustainable market and other livelihood opportunities, shaping ethics and culture, and revitalizing education through transformative projects. Each of these four areas of transformative potential will be discussed
in turn.
RCE Policy Leadership and Prospects for Post-2014 Policy
National governments are currently being asked how they will contribute to the
GAP. Strategically, RCEs can offer to help governments with suggestions for both
policies, programs and various types of resourcing needed at local, regional and national levels, in addition to helping implement initiatives. RCEs are also responsible
for reminding national governments of previous commitments made during the
DESD as well as new state roles given within the terms of GAP. Thus there is aneed to ensure that national and local governments and regional offices of UN
agencies are made aware of RCEs and their role in advancing ESD. Such offices
could assist in networking RCEs at a continental scale or in relation to addressing
specific sustainability issues that are part of their mandate.

Box 9.5
Gathering Youth Voices
RCE Oldenburger Münsterland in Germany
demonstrated the power of local youth voices
through its regional Youth Report. They gauged how youth and young adults between
the ages of 12 and 24 years judged the attractiveness of their region in terms of theircont.

The global discourse of sustainable development
must always be open to questioning at the local level.
A prime example is to make provision for the worldviews and voices of indigenous peoples. There is a riskthat sustainable development will overwhelm or
exclude some of the specific qualities and dimensionsof indigenous knowledge, such as spirituality and theunderstanding of human kinship with all living things(Tunks, 2013; Thomas, 2011). RCEs can help keep local,
grounded, practical and responsive knowledge andPart IIIactivities alive and shape policy at national and global scales. For example, RCE Greater Portland’s NGO
partner, Wisdom of the Elders, collects the stories
and knowledge of Native Americans and shares theirtraditional knowledge with youth within and outsideof their indigenous communities. A further RCE example involves gathering voices of youth (see Box 9.5).

private and professional future along withidentifying action-oriented policy changes
that could promote their desire to stay andwork in the region. These results inform future
political, educational and economic decisions at a regional level through a multistakeholder advisory board established by the
RCE. This regional data is especially importantas the results of national or international youth
studies often misjudge or disregard thespecific situations and challenges of young
people, particularly those in rural regions.
	

Given examples like these, the proposal to extend contributions of RCEs to the GAP is founded on 10 yearsof implementation and practice. Hopefully, these efforts will generate an international imperative forgovernments to support and implement the work of
RCEs as part of their global actions and responsibilities. Implementation at this scale suggests the needfor major strengthening of institutional capacity through UNESCO and possibly
through other UN agencies and global partners, with strategies for national levelinstitutional development. At this level it will be most effective to build the capacity of organizations already working for ESD. Given the scale and urgency of the
GAP, an implementation plan akin to important global agreements such as theConvention on Biological Diversity or the UN Declaration of Human Rights isneeded.

To achieve this, every country where RCEs operate and where governments havesigned a protocol for implementation of ESD could be asked to establish an RCEled Commission for ESD to oversee and support policy development, professional
development for leadership, curriculum development and integration of ESD into
early childhood, primary, secondary and tertiary education. Such commissions
could then ensure that the dynamic and responsive processes of RCEs continue toinform public policy and practices. Such a role includes safeguarding the uniqueindigenous education programs and development initiatives, as well as embracing the social sciences and humanities in addition to science and technology.
Such provisions ensure that ESD continues to benefit from diversity of practice,and that public policy for ESD retains a dynamic quality that resists the risk of
becoming enclosed in institutional ideology.
Innovations in Policy Processes, Programs and Projects for ESD
A key RCE contribution exists in helping inform appropriate policies for ESD. If
policies reflect the intentional goals of organizations then sustainable development requires self-awareness, reflection and revisions to existing policies withingovernments, businesses, NGOs, cooperatives, professional organizations, andeducation institutions (among others). When creating such policies, the challenge is to remain grounded within local and regional dimensions of sustainability,
including the diverse voices of all stakeholders. Such an alignment will not occur
through top-down processes. These international and national policies need tobe responsive to (rather than constrain) local policy formulation for ESD that,in turn, is tied to locally embedded practitioners of sustainable development. An
iterative and educational global and national listening exercise in policy formation(vs. a centralized command-control model) would allow for reformulation andtransmission of global and national policies back to diverse communities who see
these policies reflected in their realities.

221

222

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

How is such a process to be managed and constructive policy cycles created?
RCEs provide potential vehicles for being attentive to regional policies of variousorganizational sectors and inspire learning across sectors and geographic regions.
Through the ongoing incorporation of government policymakers in RCE decisionmaking structures and networking with national and local government authorities at RCE events, RCEs provide an opportunity for essential networking
between governmental authorities. The exchange of information can also be enabled through the development and collection of model SD policies from various
governments into an RCE database that can be adapted to specific contexts. In addition, RCEs are able to pioneer new regional authorities helping to monitor andregulate sustainability issues that are either trans-jurisdictional or subregional.
Chapter 6 provides examples of how RCEs can critically and constructively engage
in policy processes in various regions.
RCEs can facilitate the delivery of programs for ESD at a regional/local level where
there are larger scale national or global funding bodies (and/or organizations with
non-financial resources) committed to advancing dimensions of ESD including
the SDGs currently under negotiation. UN agencies can see RCEs as UN ambassadors within local communities and as active partners and promoters of the values,
conventions and initiatives of the UN, including those dealing with SD, ESD andglobal citizenship. The workability on the ground of UN and other organizational
programs can be enhanced where RCEs serve as both implementers and sounding boards for improving program design, especially where organizations recognize the need for some flexibility in how this delivery takes place.
To the extent that RCEs mobilize ESD efforts, frequently on a voluntary basis, key
conventions arising from UN sustainable development agendas (such as thosedealing with climate change, biological diversity and desertification) and the new
SDGs can serve as regional rallying points for ESD. This is distinguished fromtraditional UN programs being primarily implemented through national governments. This new model creates a very different and innovative role for various
global covenants and agreements for ESD than has existed in the past, and new
dynamics around how such local programs or projects should be supported,
monitored and evaluated, recognizing that resources often principally derive fromlocal communities.
RCEs are also able to provide important policy and programmatic innovations foreducational organizations, especially as it relates to educational curricula. Programmatically, RCEs can also create living laboratory projects that directly engage
individuals in situated learning experiences. For example, RCE Saskatchewan is
employing an eco-museum model to develop living laboratories in both urbanneighbourhoods and rural communities within its region. The University of Western Sydney‘s Hawksbury Riverfarm in RCE Greater Western Sydney is anotherimportant example of a living laboratory (see Fadeeva, Payyappallimana & Petry,
2012, Chapter 5).
In developing new educational programs, a further challenge is the need to recognize new paradigms of knowledge that are intentionally associated with actions
and processes. Such transformative practices are key to the future. Sustainable development, by its nature, involves activity. While building upon a new paradigm of© Tim Sackton, CC BY - SA 2.0

Part III

223

224

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

knowledge, however, ESD also draws upon all our previous knowledges, especiallythose that have been overlooked in the dominant development paradigms associated with industrialization. These knowledges include indigenous or traditional
ways of knowing, scientific knowledge (including the social and natural sciences),
engineering, the humanities (including areas focusing on the past (history), thefuture (e.g. ethics), and what makes life meaningful (e.g. literature, philosophy
and art)), experiential learning, learning within professions/trades/occupations,and broad-based cultural learning.
Creating Sustainable Market Opportunities and Sustainable Livelihoods
In addition to the transformative potential of RCEs in policy development andprogramming, they have further potential in the area of creating sustainable livelihood opportunities, including market opportunities. The background statementof GAP outlines the need to provide “meaningful and relevant education” andrelates this goal to the UN Secretary-General’s Global Education First Initiative“which pursues the promotion of global citizenship as one of its three priorities”(UNESCO, 2013).
At first glance, this might seem to be in tension to the extent that “relevant” education is often viewed quite narrowly to mean meeting demands for skilled or specialized labour in relation to existing market conditions. However, relevant education
for advancing citizen livelihoods would also include, for example, building skill
sets that are generally held by the public, promoting a general ability to use intermediate technologies appropriate to a given local market and/or ecological setting,and advancing non-market livelihood specializations (such as those enhancing
one’s volunteer capacity). Furthermore, implicit in “citizenship” is the notion ofself-directed, self-governing activity – whether by an individual or community – ina way that is conducive to autonomy and interdependence at the local and global
level. This implies a transformed way of thinking about how human beings makea living and how development is done, that provides much greater control thanhas historically existed to individuals and their supporting communities in thelocal, regional and global development agendas. Yet this view of greater grassroots
and community control is consistent with how sustainable development and sustainable livelihoods have been understood. RCEs can (and, in many instances, do)play a central role in generating self-reflective communities that are able to create
livelihood activities that are sustainable and meaningful.
RCEs allow communities to collectively ask the question “What is meaningful
and relevant for us and for our planet?” The ability to reflect on this question
demands an education that is grounded as much in the humanities and social
sciences as in hard sciences, mathematics and engineering. Relevant education
also implies examining the inequities and stratification systems within societies
and the timeliness in addressing local opportunities while remaining cognizant
of increasingly challenging limits imposed by our ecological, social and economic
systems. These limitations (which are, perhaps, better thought of as creative opportunities to rethink existing practices) emerge if one takes seriously one’s ethical duties towards the poor and vulnerable, to non-human species and to future
generations. RCEs can help communities take an active role in charting their own
development paths that take into account these short-term impacts and long-term
consequences. In so doing, these paths effectively map out a range of substantivePart III

freedoms for action situated in communities that are consistent with the moral
and practical imperatives of SD.

Several challenges are already evident. Many communities lack traditions of setting their own sustainable development paths. At the same time, individuals alsolack confidence and experience in constructing their own (sustainable) livelihoods.
This implies that RCEs can play an important role in providing encouragement andcourage to local innovators – whether individuals, organizations or collaborative
initiatives. Many RCEs, in identifying and providing recognition of ESD projects
at the regional level, provide this vital role. By creating platforms for sharing
stories, including successes, mistakes and lessons learned, RCEs develop new
spaces of learning for sustainable development. They also can showcase otherexamples from RCEs around the globe that may work locally to further inspirechange. This showcasing is, in part, occurring through the Global RCE Awards
program initiated by UNU in 2012 and the annual reporting requirements of
RCEs that document RCE flagship projects.
Rather than traditional models, where development happens to communities,
RCEs can provide gentle, yet persistent, leadership that empowers individuals andorganizations and provides ideas for guidance that reinforce their own decisionmaking power. This gentle leadership is especially possible where an RCE‘sauthority derives not from financial or material resources, but from its accumulated expertise. These new “houses of wisdom” respect that the need for resource
mobilization for sustainability is frequently voluntary, which requires an approachthat is respectful of the freely-willed choices of individual and community actors.
The voice of an RCE, however, is distinct to the extent that it can offer a collaborative
voice through its membership both within and outside the organizations participating in the RCE. This is enhanced to the extent that an RCE is conceptualized
as a regional movement for ESD (as opposed to only an organizational entity) andthe global RCE initiative is seen as a global movement.
As such, RCEs need to help identify strategic tipping points for action within theirrespective communities that critically examine the cultural and structural aspectsof the communities, and create game-changing conditions for sustainability thatfurther drive systemic changes. To do so, RCEs can play a role in monitoring andadvancing new livelihood practices and patterns of sustainable consumption andproduction. In addition, RCEs have a role in facilitating the education needed forthe adoption of transformative or disruptive technologies, or both, that challenge
the status quo and provide competitiveness for poor, small and medium-sizedenterprises, and alternative enterprises (such as cooperatives and credit unions).
This can play a critical role in ensuring that the well-being of the most vulnerable
is advanced, especially in regions where state and other social supports are in
decline or non-existent.
The education needed for this type of technology, which is appropriate to theneeds and challenges of a given region, is highly specific and contextual. Sustainable vocational schools advanced by RCEs can help provide such an education andtraining (especially to a broad citizenry). It is possible that, combined with such

225

226

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

schools, RCEs could help in mobilizing productive capital (buildings, equipment
and vehicles) that are available and shared at a local level from which an individual
or a small company can engage in various forms of local production and local
non-profit community organizations can mobilize such equipment on a voluntarybasis for community projects. RCE Kano and RCE Saskatchewan are among several
RCEs exploring this possibility.
RCEs can also be more intentional in identifying supportive organizations andstructures within communities and/or globally that have a structural interest in
helping these market and livelihood transformations to occur. For example, theglobal community of cooperative enterprises under the auspices of the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA) is already examining how it can, as a sector, help
advance the SDGs and has adopted sustainability as one of its five priority areas
emerging from the UN Year of the Cooperative in 2012 (ILO & ICA, 2014).
RCEs also have the potential to support broad changes in culture for sustainable
development. This requires RCEs engaging with the keepers of culture within communities. This includes intentionally engaging indigenous groups, youth, elders,faith organizations, artists and cultural organizations. This, in turn, allows for avision to emerge where all people are viewed as being both educators for SD as
well as learners within their respective contexts. From hosting films and forums
to engaging in service and reflective activities, RCEs can continue to help facilitate
cultural change towards sustainable paradigms. Using “E4 models” of education,
environment, economy and equity, ongoing transformation for sustainability can
become culturally embedded and deemed normal practice in the diversity of communities on our planet.
Intercultural Dynamics, Diversity and Ethics
Culture is the geography of sustainability, the soil in which practice is planted,
the ground for growth, the interface of people with land and productivity, andexchange. All this is a way of saying that education for sustainability is culturally
contextual. Sustainability is a framework that has the potential to be implemented
in ways that safeguard cultural diversity; it also has the potential to exert hegemony – a stifling uniformity that disregards cultural and traditional knowledge.
The specific grounding of RCEs in regions and cultures gives them not only theability to facilitate engagement among various communities in their regions (seeBox 9.6) but also a generative capacity to speak across the global network of RCEs.
The regional and global conferences bring opportunities for intercultural dialogue on a global scale to life while respecting differences. Sharing experiences andcultural knowledge from far-ranging sites such as Colombia, Peru, Uzbekistan,
Mongolia, Kenya and New Zealand, bring the globalized effort for sustainability
to the level of face-to-face encounters. Chords of resonance and of unfamiliarity
are equally compelling for recognizing the diversity and complexity of shared endeavours.
To meet the objectives of sustainable development, it is necessary to foster aknowledge dialogue, bearing in mind the great cultural diversity there is in theworld today. Academia, educational institutions and communities have to work together to rescue the knowledge and management that peasants, indigenous popu-Part IIIlations, migrants from other regions, second-generation immigrants, and othergroups have regarding their environment, in order to be included in the projects
to be carried out in the future. The contribution and support of educators, with
their work in formal and non-formal learning sectors around the planet, is fundamental to achieve the recognition and appreciation of traditional knowledge thatallow these “others” that are less visible in today’s globalized world but have muchto contribute from their traditional knowledge towards sustainable development
to be both seen and heard. Cultural diversity is a competitive advantage in many
regions worldwide, which must be assessed in its proper perspective and incorporated into development projects that are unfolding in different parts of the world.
Valuing cultural diversity involves not only respect for but also the understanding of
cultures that have other forms of knowledge and ways of appreciating what exists,that are no less valuable and useful for interpreting reality. While in many countries Western culture has been regarded as the only valid culture, there are othercultures, using other logics and worldviews, which have also developed ways tosee and interact with the environment; those ways have contributed to the respectful and harmonious management of nature and natural resources in different
parts of the world.
That is why ESD stakeholders and RCEs as networks that share ESD ideas andalso have representatives of many communities as their members, could enablea knowledge dialogue to thrive. Thus, together with academia, other institutions,andcommunities, they can build and generate proposals for environmental education and socioeconomic models that are based on the reality of ecosystems and thediversity of the cultures of the different regions. An important element to carryout the knowledge dialogue is research that will focus
on collecting and evaluating the experiences of indigBox 9.6
enous and other populations, systematizing these andCultural Diversity and Knowledge
drawing conceptual and methodological elements
Dialogue in RCE Bogotá
and alternative technologies, which form the basis forthe formulation of future policies and guidelines forThis openness to a knowledge dialogue has
action. In the words of García Canclini (2004, p.134),
already been demonstrated in countries such“conceptual work has to use different theoretical conas Colombia. In 2001, the National Policy Retributions [in] discussing their interactions.”
search framework was approved by the Ministry of Environment, which recognizes “ModeGiven systems of power and stratification around the2” research. It is represented in complex sysworld, the patterns of colonization and displacement
tems as diverse as “... traditional and alternaneed to be acknowledged to take into account the histive systems of generation and transmission
tory of the present in the way education for sustainof knowledge, innovations and ancestralability is implemented. Many initiatives to remedy
practices of indigenous, afro-descendants andhistoric breaches of trust and of treaties1 are part of anevolving process to change institutional and systemicother human populations, as well as settlers”,
patterns of domination that are firmly established andwhich are all relevant to the environment
therefore set in patterns of continuity. Changes are(Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarollo Susneeded to restore systems of indigenous tribal authortenible de Colombia, 2001, p.34). In this
ity, revitalize traditional knowledge and languages,
context RCE Bogotá developed a researchcont.
1 Many colonial systems were initiated or implemented through treaties,
such as the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand.

227

228

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

project with the Pasto indigenous community located in the south of Colombia, tosee how climate change is affecting foodsecurity, the motherland, and the cultureof the indigenous population. This qualitative research explores a case study
on the recovery of traditional knowledge
regarding the ancestral and indigenous chagra
and minga communities. The strategies explored in the case study ensure food security inthe community through mitigating climatechange. It is important to mention that minga isa practice that involves friends and neighbours
coming together to do communal work accompanied by some benefit (such as an elaborate meal provided by the recipient of thehelp).
It is important to disclose these practices,knowledge and strategies from the perspective of indigenous tradition in the Latin
American, Asia-Pacific and African contexts,
as these practices point out different ways of
relating to the environment; they “preserve
biodiversity and provide inspiration to respondjointly and properly to the global issues weface currently” (Bermúdez et al., 2005, p.
120). The contribution and strong support
from ESD educators, whose work can disseminate this knowledge and values in educational institutions of all levels, located in different
regional and local contexts around the world,
will be essential to achieving these goals thatcan promote and be consolidated within the
global RCE network and on behalf of the
GAP. 

address gross disparity in educational, employment
and health outcomes, enable return of indigenous
lands, and restore cultural systems and economies. In
today’s world this requires a proactive and conscious
strategy of cultural recognition.
The establishment and support of RCEs enable thislegacy to be engaged. Supporting cultural diversity
withinRCEs informs remedial ways of working, develops shared and forward-looking pathways andfosters partnerships with indigenous communities
in an RCE’s region. The idea of remedy includes cultural respect, setting aside dominant assumptions
and worldviews, having openness to knowledge fromdifferent cultural traditions, and approaching programs and planning in consultation and partnershipwith indigenous communities and all stakeholders asmuch as possible. Remedy has the further dimensionof working for beneficial environmental and social
outcomes, so intercultural relations include forging
improvements in the health of rivers and transitions
to low carbon energy, in addition to employment pathways in work for sustainability such as clean energy,organic agriculture, green technology, corporate social
responsibility and environmental accountability. RCEspresent the opportunity to restore the cultivationof relational ethics that are respectful of cultural difference and that are Earth-centred.
Yet it is also true that sustainability has been interpreted by some to serve the purposes of corporate
exploitation and profit at the expense of the environment and, indeed, through the exploitation of people.
An identification of ethical principles may reduce thesusceptibility of sustainability to such weak interpretations. The quest for an ethics to express universal
principles that guide RCEs and yet uphold culturally and socially diverse practices can be found in thenotion of responsibility.

As Sizoo (2010) found in a comparative study, while understandings of responsibility vary, it has a universal quality. In some cultures obligations are handed down
through generations and thus extend across time; they can be between species,
with understandings of all living beings as related. In Western cultures, responsibility has more of an element of choice; it may be associated with legal duties
and have a personal orientation with a more limited time scale. Nevertheless, thisis an ethic that expresses interdependence, recognizing that all living things arebound together, with each other and the planet.

Part IIIAs practices of sustainability move towards more ecocentric worldviews and to
economic systems which take account of life-sustaining services provided byecosystems, ethics need to evolve to become not only inter-human but alsointer-species. RCE practices, through recognition of cultural diversity within
an RCE and across communities, must also involve recognition of systems andpractices that are destructive to the planet and that perpetuate injustice.
Transformative Learning
A further potential of RCEs relates to an RCE’s ability to transform learning.
Transformative education is a paradigm shift away from education to shapeindividualistic agency, ownership and competitiveness. It embraces a relational
understanding of human development that is other-centred rather than self-centred.
Transformative education embraces ecologically-centred perspectives, rather thana human-centred worldview, with people considered as part of a dynamic and interdependent whole.
Education for sustainable development is also inclusiveof experiential learning, such as in civics, wherestudents participate in strategic planning for theschool, in forming submissions to local councils andcontributing to public forums. Such opportunities for
direct participation are supported by transformative
learning processes that question assumptions that areoften taken for granted. Asking how to move into the
future consciously and deliberately involves asking
bigger questions about values and purpose: “What is
important to us? What are the consequences of ouractions? How do we relate to one another and to ourcommunities?” When young people and adults learnin engaged and transformative ways, they recognize
how their actions have been based unconsciously on
beliefs, values, feelings and judgments assimilated
from others. They often reframe their deepest understanding of how things work personally and professionally, and in the groups, communities, organizations and society in which they live and work. Of course,
transformative learning looks and feels different indifferent cultures. A small anecdote (Box 9.7) demonstrates experiential and transformative learning as included in the RCE Waikato program.
A further example of transformative learning is tied
to problem-based learning linked to specific issues ofsustainability in a given region. This, in turn, promotes
research and innovation. A valuable example comesfrom the OPEDUCA Project approach developed by
RCE Rhine-Meuse and adopted by many RCEs. Box
9.8 provides an example where sustainability issues
related to water were a central focus.

Box 9.7
Water has Consciousness
A group of scientists, university students andkura (Māori medium language school) took
an observational river walk with a Māori Kaitiaki (tribal guardian). Bulldozers were being
used to remove the surrounding willow trees
from the adjacent land, leaving the groundbarren and exposed, denuding the river of its
protective skin and shade. Willow trees are
deemed invasive and damaging to the river
ecosystem. The cooling effects of trees on
the dynamics of water and sedimentation had
not been accounted for. Erosion was evident
along the banks, native seedlings were destroyed and signs of algal blooms from water
exposed to the sun were evident. The Kaitiaki
claimed, “Water has consciousness.” A student inquired further, and the response was“Water has intelligence. The behaviour of theriver will change to respond to the increase inlight and heat from the removal of trees andchanges in sedimentation processes from theloss of root systems.” (TeRangiita, R. Personalcommunication, Turangi, 2013). This transformative learning experience highlighted
the river as a living being with an integrated
river ecology. It brought into question decisions that prioritize development interests overecological integrity.

229

230

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections andProspects for RCEs Post-2014

		Participants in the 6th GLobal
RCE Conference in Kerkrade,
The Netherlands

Part III

231

232

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

Box 9.8
Problem-based Learning
An example of one of the many ... goodpractices is based on the theme of water andcomes from the Graaf Huyn College in thecity of Sittgard-Geleen (The Netherlands). …
A group of 200 students, aged from 14 to 15,
started working on the theme in late 2011
… [T]eams of students explored the themeof water, performing extensive research andsharing and debating the answers they collectively found. Questions that remained unanswered were handed over to the RCE Secretariat, partner companies and knowledge
institutions. A phase of arranged visits fromstudents to their “partners in knowledge”
followed. These were full of guided tours, excursions, debates and experiments. Lessons
learned during these visits were presented by
students at the School Market to peers, managers, parents, teachers and policymakers.
This phase alone was a large happening andbecame a festival of learning for 200 students
and around 300 visitors. (Fadeeva et al. 2012,p. 105)

Box 9.9
Non-formal Education as ESD
One of the objectives of RCE Bogotá has been
the promotion of non-formal education andcitizen environmental education as education
for sustainability. The RCE community sees
the challenge of environmental educationand ESD into the future as being of great
importance, with its role as a key element in
the strategy of cultural change (Bermúdez,2003). This strategy fosters innovative pedagogy that breaks traditional patterns andcovers a new paradigm that favours the valueof the same, that encourages knowledge of
our ecosystems and cultures, and the proper
management of our “biological and cultural
treasures” (Morin, 2000), and helps clarify thecont.

Reaching Wide: Going Beyond Formal Education
The network of RCEs can help disseminate the values,
behaviours and lifestyles for a sustainable future andfor positive societal transformation by implementing
non-formal education programs for a wider coverage of the population that falls outside of the formal
education that is taught in the classroom. Non-formal
education is education that reaches the ordinary citizen,
the housewife, the elderly and all those who do not
go to school or university – a great number of people
who, for a variety of reasons, are not addressed by theformal education system. The network of RCEs has
proposed and developed projects within the domainof non-formal education or across formal and nonformal education, which seek to achieve educational changes as well as open new spaces that facilitate comprehensive training for all, including lifelong
learners and those that are disenfranchised and marginalized. Such education would have special characteristics, paying attention to values that might be lostor under-emphasized at this time, such as solidarity,
respect for diversity and all forms of life, collaboration,
environmental ethics and responsibility. Box 9.9 provides an RCE example of non-formal education.
Evaluation as Learning: Appreciativereflection on RCE processes
Part of the transformative learning engaged in by
RCEs relates to the role evaluation has played in theevolution of RCEs. As RCEs contemplate their future
handprint in expanding ESD in the post-DESD period,
UNU-IAS has appropriately facilitated an appreciativeenquiry of the past experiences of RCEs as a guide to
mapping out the future. Recent RCE evaluation processes were carried out in Australia, Asia, Europe andAfrica and have included very young RCEs (that are
mostly looking at learning from the early mobilization
stage and developmental evaluation) to older RCEslearning from existing processes and formulating
and measuring outcomes and impacts. Chapter 7 demonstrates how various approaches have been usedin different contexts resulting in the development of a
hybrid evaluation framework by a group of southern
African RCEs.

Part III

Concluding Reflections: Developinga global learning space for ESD and
the importance of freedom
As shown, RCEs possess distinctive transformative
potential related to policy and program development,sustainable livelihoods, ethics and culture, and transformative learning, including evaluation of learning.
All of these potentials, grounded in the distinctive
collaborative partnering arrangements of RCEs, aremade possible by the freedom RCEs have to form thesepartnerships in the first place, based on the needs oftheir regions. The creation of a global learning spacefor ESD built on these distinctive transformative potentials and outlined in the Tongyeong Declarationmust also be built on this freedom of inquiry.

meaning of being a citizen of the world. The
RCE’s Forum Environmental Program seeks to
educate citizens of the city of Bogotá towards
achieving harmonious interactions between
society and nature in their personal and collective life (Bermúdez, 2003), encouraging
practices such as healthy eating, recycling,
responsible consumption, citizen participation, a sense of belonging and identity withthe city and its public spaces, among others.
It encourages learning and teaching processes that facilitate collaboration among participants, who belong to different educational
levels and age groups. It contributes to the
dialogue of knowledge among the public,
academia, traditional knowledge representatives, universities, educational institutions
and environmental NGOs, contributing theirexperience in voluntary work with communities, thereby enriching teamwork. It promotes
innovative, free, open and inclusive spaces inwhich the joint construction of knowledge
and reflection make possible ”discoveries”
and dissemination of advanced projects indifferent contexts and practices, providing
adequate solutions for regional and local
needs.

As an initiative of UNU, RCEs see themselves, inpart, as a global scholarly network with a central goalof research and innovation related to ESD. As a global
scholarly network, RCEs need to structurally resist
being categorized in such a way that hampers theircuriosity and freedom to investigate the most promising educational solutions to sustainable development
challenges whether or not they fall within the priority
research and action areas of specific organizations(whether national and state governments, businesses,
NGOs, etc.). The participation of RCEs with higher
education partners presupposes that conditions ofacademic freedom need to be maintained by the RCE as part of this UNU initiative.
The loss of the formal conditions of academic freedom through administrative restrictions imposed on RCEs through administrative directives (more appropriate
in the corporate or government worlds) would lead to RCEs losing credibility
from the higher education sector and, in turn, a reduced capacity to freely mobilize (both financially and ethically) the support of individual professors, students
and other community-based scholars. Ultimately these educational partners are
motivated through curiosity resulting, in turn, in pursuing investigator-driven
research – all of which only occurs under conditions of scholarly freedom.

Having stated this, there is much to be curious about in the ESD agenda and RCEs
can harness the creative energies inspired by such curiosity about what a sustainable future might look like. The needs and actions of their specific organizational partners, communities and regions may prioritize particular issue areas andpractical problems related to sustainable development that require research andinnovation, which may not traditionally have emerged within higher educationand other research settings. Learning that takes place within these living laboratories can then be globally networked among RCEs with exchanges of people,
technologies and educational resources that, in turn, can be freely adapted to particular local settings.

233

234

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

A global learning space will emerge as RCEs receive further structural support(both financial and in-kind) from international organizations (e.g. UNU and otherUN agencies, global businesses and cooperative organizations committed to SD,
human service organizations and environmental NGOs). The additional support
will enable RCEs to flourish as a global community. During the DESD, RCEs proved their worth with only modest resourcing from UNU and other UN bodies, buthave not been able to achieve their full potential. Further support from UN bodies
and other international organizations during the next decade can symbolically
legitimize RCEs to other regional actors. It will also help them implement their
ESD strategies more effectively, given that RCEs canenable global organizational partnering with local
Box 9.10
organizations that are most able to deliver programIndividual RCE Programs Addressing
matically their national and international goals. SuchMultiple GAP Target Areas
resourcing needs to be done in a way that is fully transparent and not restrictive of an RCE‘s local autonomy,
A practical example of such a program would
in order to maintain the trust of its constituents andintegrate three of the GAP priorities: (1) wholebest meet the needs of its communities.
institution approaches, (2) improved qualifications of educators, and (3) youth. In thisRCEs are new structures that seek to bring wholecase, universities of applied sciences could
institution approaches of ESD to the policy level
be encouraged to support TVET at the seto give effect to the second goal of the GAP (2014,
condary level; cooperation of classical univerp. 3, sec. 9). In this case, at both a regional and global
sities with universities of applied scienceslevel, RCEs become a reference and impetus for policould facilitate their research components;
cy development. They are also a source for research on
and, finally, appropriate evaluation systems
whole-institution approaches for regional organizatioand counting prior learning by giving relevant
nal stakeholders and national and international orgacredits would facilitate an educational connizations. In addition, the RCE global learning spacetinuum that provides innovative models for
can also holistically approach all five areas of the GAP
lifelong learning. One could also conceptuthrough strategic regional approaches to ESD, potenally imagine the following program being detially addressing more than one of these five target
veloped by RCEs in their regions that addresareas at a time (see Box 9.10).
sed all five target areas of the GAP, namely,“youth educators in local communities for
Looking ahead, a rational synergy of the GAP prioritransformation of policies leading to wholeties could be seen as a precondition for transformative
institution approaches for ESD”. Such a proup-scaling of ESD work. Growing RCE networks cangram could be implemented by a school
increase collective impact by facilitating connectionsof public policy, working with a high school
between different levels of education and between
within a given RCE or with multiple RCEs.
different forms and sectors of education (formal andnon-formal) in implementing all five priorities. The
fifth priority area (focused on ESD and communities) could be especially highlighted by RCEs as they seek to provide bottom-up versus top-down learning opportunities for sustainable development. In this way RCEs could supply networksof organizations and institutions of all educational sectors with material, concepts
and knowledge that are grounded in the circumstances of their respective regions,
thereby increasing collective impact, overall.

Part IIIRCE Tongyeong's Bridge to the World project

References
Bermúdez, O.M. (2003). Cultura y ambiente. La
educación ambiental contexto y perspectivas. Bogotá:
IDEA-Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Bermúdez, O. M., Mayorga, M., Jacanamijoy, B.,
Ati, Q. & Teolinda, F. (2005). El diálogo de saberes yla educaciónambiental. Bogotá: IDEA-Universidad
Nacional de Colombia.
Bernstein, S., Gupta, J., Andresen, S., Haas, P.M.,
Kanie, N., Kok, M., Levy, M.A. & Stevens, C. (2014).
Coherent governance, the UN and the SDGs. Post 2015
Policy Brief #4. Tokyo: United Nations University
Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability(UNU-IAS). Retrieved August 1, 2014 fromhttp://i.unu.edu/media/ias.unu.edu-en/news/3856/
Post2015_UNU-IAS_PolicyBrief4.pdf
Canclini, N. (2004). Diferentes, desiguales ydesconectados. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa.
Durie, E,T. & Aikman, H. (2006). Custom andhuman rights in the Pacific. New Zealand Law
Commission.
Earth System Governance. (2014). Retrieved August30, 2014 from http://www.earthsystemgovernance.
org/

Fadeeva, Z., Payyappallimana, U. & Petry, R.A.
(Eds.). (2012). Towards more sustainable consumption
and production systems and sustainable livelihoods.
Yokohama, Japan: UNU-IAS.
Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., Rockström, J., Öhman, M.C., Shyamsundar, P., Steffen,W., Glaser, G., Kanie, N. & Noble, I. (2012). Sustainable Development Goals for people and planet.
Nature, 495, 305-307.
ILO & ICA. (2014). Cooperatives and the Sustainable
Development Goals: A contribution to the post-2015
development debate. Retrieved September 10, 2014
from http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/--ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_240640.pdf
Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility: In
search of an ethics for the technological age. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Martin, B. (2014) Responsibility matters for Earthjurisprudence. Paper presented at Earth Law
Conference, New Thinking on Sustainablity, Victoria
University, Wellington, New Zealand. Submitted toSpecial Edition, Australasian Law Journal.
Martin, B. (2000). Place: An ethics of culturaldifference and location. Educational Philosophy andTheory, 32 (1), 82-91.

235

236

Chapter 9 The First 10 Years: Reflections and Prospects for RCEs Post-2014

Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible deColombia. (2001). National Policy Research. Bogotá.
Morín, E. (2000). Los sietes aberes necesarios parala educación del futuro. Bogotá: Ministerio de
EducaciónNacional de Colombia.

Transfer-21 Programme. (2007). Guide for sustainable development at the secondary level: Justifications,competences, learning opportunities. Berlin: Transfer-21 Programme. Retrieved August 7, 2014 fromhttp://www.transfer-21.de/daten/materialien/Orientierungshilfe/Guide_competences_engl_online.pdf

O’Donoghue, R., Pesanayi, T., Kachilonda, D.K. &Taylor, J. (2014). An open framework for a lessons
learned and a developmental evaluation process in
SADC RCEs. Unpublished RCE evaluation
presentation toolkit.

Tunks, A. (2013). One indigenous vision for sustainable law? Tensions and prospects. In K. Bosslemann
and D. Grinlinton(Eds.). Environmental law for asustainable society (pp. 97-121). Auckland: NZ Centre
for Environmental Law, University of Auckland.

SARUA. (2014). Climate change counts: Strengthening university contributions to climate compatible
development in southern Africa. Volume 1, Knowledge
Co-Production Framework. Cape Town: Southern
African Regional Universities Association.

United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment. (1992). Agenda 21. Retrieved August
1, 2014 from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

Sizoo, E. (2010). Responsibility and cultures of theworld. P.I.E.: Peter Lang.
Thomas, N. (2011). Maori concepts of rangatiratanga, kaitiakitanga, the environment, and property
rights. In D. Grinlinton and P. Taylor (Eds.) Property
rights and sustainability: The evolution of property
rights to meet ecological challenges (pp. 219-248). Legal
Aspects of Sustainable Development Series. Bedfordshire, UK: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Tongyeong Declaration. (2012). Adopted by the 7th
Global RCE Conference, Tongyeong, Republic ofKorea, 24 September 2012. Retrieved August 7,
2014 from http://archive.ias.unu.edu/resource_centre/Tongyeong%20Declaration%20FINAL.pdf

United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. (2012). People’s Sustainability Treaty on Higher
Education. Retrieved July 27, 2014 from http://
uncsd2012.org/index.php?page=view&type=1006&menu=153&nr=135
UNESCO. (2013). Global Action Programme on
ESD. Available from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0022/002243/224368e.pdf
UNESCO-CEPES. (2007). Quality assurance andaccreditation: A glossary of basic terms and definitions. Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES. Retrieved
August 1, 2014 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0013/001346/134621e.pdf
UNU. (2013). RCE assessment and evaluation background paper. Tokyo: United Nations University.

Part III

237

238

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Part III

Chapter 10

Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral
Learning Partnerships: Parallels between
the RCE Initiative and the Earlier Rise of
Humanism and Science1
Roger A. PetryIf history is to be any guide in seeking to move to sustainable ecological, social, and economic systems, one can usefully examine historic transitions fromearlier systems in crisis. A historical focus is important where sustainability isviewed as necessitating substantial changes to current production practices
and existing organizational and institutional arrangements. Such an examination is also merited given significant amounts of time between these majortransitions. A bird’s eye view of history can shed light on the significant potential of the global network of RCEs that have emerged rapidly since the start of
the DESD in 2005 and are, arguably, one of its success stories.2 Created under
the auspices of UNU as a global learning system, RCEs share important parallels with earlier multistakeholder learning initiatives that, in turn, were central
to historic developments in new forms of scholarship and knowledge production, specifically the rise of science and the earlier rise of humanistic knowledge.
These parallels support the contention that the RCE initiative is an important
global institutional and organizational development3 in education and researchwith the potential to produce much needed knowledge in transitioning to sustainable global systems.

1 An earlier version of this chapter was originally published as chapter 15 in Fadeeva, Z., Payyappallimana, U., and Petry, R (Eds). (2012)
Towards more sustainable consumption and production systems and sustainable livelihoods (110-123). Yokohama: United Nations University.
2 Now in 2014 numbering nearly 130, the RCEs are notable for emerging under a period of significant resource constraints andretrenchment within higher education globally, receiving only modest financial support.
3 Substantive innovation for sustainable development requires innovation in both the institutions and organizational structures advancing research and other elements of scholarship (such as teaching and community service). New institutionalism theory usefully
distinguishes between institutions and organizations where institutions are “sets of rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes” while organizations are “material entities with employees, offices, equipment, budgets, and (often) legal personality” (Young,
2002, p.5). A scholarly institution, for example, would be the scientific method understood as a kind of social practice (along withrules defining the roles of scientists and their interactions) while scholarly organizations would include specific universities, colleges,
vocational and technical institutes (among others).

239

240

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Specific forms of institutional innovation in research that can support transitions
to new sustainable systems are possible in light of both the opportunities and limiting conditions found in existing institutional arrangements and organizational
players.4 The historical and contemporary cases examined below of multisectoral
learning organizations established outside the traditional academy illustrate thecapacity of large-scale systems to creatively innovate across organizational andgeographic boundaries. These new organizations build on resources from multiple types of existing organizations including financial resources, but also conceptual and other in-kind resources. At the same time, an examination of the process
or pathway of their formation illustrates likely constraints in the development of
their modes of research, methods of disseminating this research and mobilizationof resources to support this research.

RCEs, the Royal
Society of London
and the Trilingual
College of Leuven

The relatively recent formation of the RCEs can usefully be compared with earlier
historic multistakeholder scholarly organizations. These are characterized by the
involvement of both academic and non-academic leadership in their formation.
While associated with universities and retaining academic freedom they act outside the traditional structures and powers of the academy. They are notable forhaving pioneered new models of knowledge production and dissemination within
their geographic contexts and time periods enabling the transformation of existing social and economic systems during periods of crisis.5 While a number ofsuch organizations might be considered, two historic examples will be consideredthat meet these criteria. The Royal Society of London for the Advancement of Natural Knowledge, founded in 1660, was a self-governing fellowship that included(but was not restricted to) university scholars and pioneered the scientific method(see Box 10.1). Associated with the rise of this scientific knowledge was a range oftechnologies central to the industrial revolution beginning in the mid-18th century
in the United Kingdom. An earlier historical innovation in learning and scholarship is found with the rise of humanistic goals in education. One can, for example, see in the teachings of Confucius (551-479 BCE) and the Confucian school ofthought emphasizing the need for rulers to be ethically virtuous in their official
roles with an appeal to a study of earlier historical periods as a model for socialand political reform. A much later example (for the purposes of this study chosen
for its historical proximity and accessibility of historical records) is the development of the Trilingual College (Collegium Trium Linguarum/Collegium Trilingue)
of Leuven, Belgium, in 1517. The Trilingual College is credited with advancing
the rise of humanism in northern Europe by drawing upon the classical writingsof the ancient Roman, Greek and Near Eastern societies that, in turn, had broadorganizational and cultural impacts in Northern Europe during this time period(see Box 10.1). The innovations in knowledge production of the Royal Society andearlier humanistic schools subsequently became incorporated in higher education organizations, so it is now commonplace for universities to have specialized
departments in the sciences and humanities.
4 The Brundtland Commission report, Our Common Future, noted early on that “[t]he concept ofsustainable development does imply limits - not absolute limits but limitations imposed by the present state of technology and social organization on environmental resources and by the ability of thebiosphere to absorb the effects of human activities” (1987, pp. 3.27).
5 These new models of knowledge production are subsequently formally incorporated within theinstitutional frameworks of higher education organizations once their scholarly merits and social andeconomic benefits have been demonstrated.

Part IIIIn considering points of comparison, one important commonality between RCEs,
the Royal Society and the Trilingual College has been the participation of scholars
and higher education organizations in their formation, yet in ways that innovate
beyond the traditional academy. These three organizations can, at the same time,
be usefully contrasted given the differing role played by other institutions andorganizations in their creation. As such, while there are common roles needing to
be played in supporting the respective organizational governance structures andinspiring new kinds of innovation, these roles are seemingly played by different
organizations and institutional forms in the case of RCEs, the Royal Society and
the Trilingual College. A listing of different institutional forms supporting distinct organizational types is provided in Table 10.1. The listing reflects the historic
emergence and seeming institutional dependence of each, with volunteerism as
the chronologically latest form, working back to those that arise in earlier time
periods. The earliest voluntary sector organizations emerged in the 19th and early
20th century (for example, the YMCA or Scouting). These became institutionallypossible where individuals in society were freely and legally able to volunteer and,hence, associate and mobilize resources around social causes they found desirable
yet typically deemed inadequately addressed by other organizations (such as government or business).6 The development of market organizations is earlier thanthat of the formal voluntary sector, with merchants and their commercial activity
evident, for example, in feudal societies and earlier classical periods (see, for example, Zacour, 1976, pp. 39-67).7 Other contemporary institutions and organizational forms which are familiar, such as aristocratic or religious forms, had (asidentified by anthropologists) earlier origins with distinct purposes and traditionalmodels of governance.8
If one examines the primary institutional processes and concepts being employedby each multisectoral learning organization, it will be argued that RCEs principally apply volunteerism and institutions of the voluntary sector to advance newforms of research and scholarship, while the Royal Society historically appliedmarket institutions and concepts in developing science, and the Trilingual College
applied state/governmental institutions and concepts in advancing humanism. They
also apply these institutions (volunteer, market and governmental, respectively) totheir governance structures. At the same time, a critical set of research questions
and resourcing for each organization initially seem to be associated with thoseorganizations providing social supports and maintaining social order in the given
time period of their creation. In this case it will be argued that governmental orga-

6 This freedom to associate emerged with the rise of modern democracies and rights of citizenship.
It also relied on legal powers of incorporation associated with the market where entities (such as
for-profit corporations with limited liabilities and, now, not-for-profit corporations) have legal standing as persons under the law.
7 Such market activity, in turn, depends on institutional frameworks (such as ownership of private
property and contract law) made possible by governments/states (such as monarchs) and their imposition of codified laws and judicial systems over large territories.
8 The remaining institutional forms in the table can, in turn, be seen as having their historic roots
and institutional dependence on the earlier form listed in the row beneath it. The last four forms(state, aristocratic, religious and family) likely parallel the political organizations identified by anthropologists (namely, states, chiefdoms, tribes and bands) and the institutional developments associatedwith each form. For an anthropological overview of these see Ember &Ember, 1996, pp. 431-439. It
should be noted, however, that these earlier forms may take advantage of contemporary institutionalframeworks to advance their interests and build their capacities, so that a mosque or church may become legally incorporated and make use of the freedoms made possible by a robust citizenship (suchas freedom of belief and association) analogous to organizations in the voluntary sector.

241

242

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Institutional form

Examples of associatedorganizations

Historical sequenceof development

VoluntaryNot-for-profit corporations,
voluntary associations

LatestMarketPrivate businesses, cooperatives

Governmental/State

National governments, provincial/state governments, city/municipal governments, international
governmental organizations (e.g.
the UN)

Aristocratic

Nobility/aristocracies andspecialized craft guilds/
professional associations

Religious

Faith organizations (e.g. temples,
synagogues, churches, mosques)

FamilyImmediate and extended families

Earliest

Table 10.1 Institutional Forms, Associated Organizations andHistorical Development

nizations (city governments, provincial, national and also intergovernmental organizations such as the UN) have played this role with RCEs (as shown in Chapter1), while the Royal Society relied on the support of the aristocracy, and the Trilingual College on religious organizations, specifically the Christian church.9 At thesame time, the innovations of these multisectoral scholarly organizations receive
some support and have substantial benefits over the long-term for the dominant
productive sectors of the day.10

New Multisectoral
Learning Partnerships: The Role ofHigher Education

From the perspective of scholarly capacity, the participation of higher education
organizations in each multisectoral learning partnership plays an important rolein legitimizing new forms of scholarly activity not yet formally accepted within
the traditional academy.11 This allows the participation, recognition, and supportof students and professors in a new scholarly enterprise. At the same time, higher
education’s participation helps assert a culture of academic freedom in these part-

9 Interestingly, from Table 1 it is evident that each of the organizational types that initially posed theresearch questions and provided resourcing for the particular scholarly network (for example, theChristian church in the case of the Trilingual College) is at an institutional level two earlier in timethan the institutional form inspiring the new mode of scholarship and governance structure associated with it (for example, the state/government in the case of the Trilingual College). In the caseof RCEs, governmental organizations (a much older institutional form) have helped frame researchquestions and provide resourcing for RCEs, while volunteerism (two institutional forms more recent
or “younger” in Table 1) inspires the new form of scholarship and governance model of RCEs.
10 In Table 1, these dominant production forms are located between the newest institutional form at
the time inspiring new forms of scholarship and the institutional form providing initial resourcing
and general research questions. For example, in the case of RCEs and in the current time period,
market institutions and organizations shaping the dominant system of global production are locatedbetween the voluntary and the state sector.
11 The Trilingual College relied on the scholarly support of the University of Leuven while the Royal
Society relied on the initial support of Gresham College, London, and RCEs, UNU and higher education partners within their respective regions.

Part IIInerships, more specifically, a capacity for investigator-driven research, something
typically constrained in moments of broad social resource constraints associatedwith each of these periods of institutional innovation.

In forming the new multisectoral learning organizations under consideration,
each creatively applies ways of knowing, productive practices, and institutional
forms associated with the latest or newest type of organization in a given time
period (such as volunteer organizations in the present time period). By applying
the most recent institutional form to pressing research problems of the day, thiscreatively generates new paradigms of knowledge, new ways of conceiving human andnatural systems, new scholarly governance structures enabling new forms of knowledge
production (including new research methods), and new forms of knowledge dissemination and technology. In the case of the Trilingual College of Leuven, one sees theapplication of state or government ideas to pressing research questions of the 16th
century; with the Royal Society one sees the application of market ideas to address
research questions of the 17th century; and lastly, with the RCE network one sees
the application of voluntary sector ideas to address pressing questions of sustainable development of the late 20th and early 21st century. Each will be discussed inturn.
In the case of the Trilingual College the state idea of the centralized will of a kingor government shaped the College’s structure; in this case the College was literally
determined by the dictates of the legal will of the late cardinal Jerome Busleyden(d. 1517) expressing his personal will, plan, and intentions for the College(DeVocht, 1951 vol. 1, pp. vii-ix). Later the terms of this will acted as a legislative
constitution for the College (ibid, vol. 1, p.6). Ideas of state autonomy were also
implicit in how texts were to be studied. Classical texts on their own were treated as autonomous objects of study from which to derive evidence, rather thanrelying on “the word of the master” (ibid, vol. 1, p. vi, 239). In turn, inferenceswere made from an accurate reading of these texts to other subject areas (such as
theology) or to one’s personal life (in applying their humanizing ethic). Students
as autonomous learners were also able to choose whether or not to attend thesefreely offered courses, as they were not part of the set curriculum (ibid, vol. 1, p.
vi). Through personal study, students were also expected to employ their own autonomous reasoning when examining texts (ibid).
Market ideas were also creatively employed in the formation of the Royal Society
and the practice of science. Knowledge is generated to meet the needs of society –to be useful – yet without judging the moral, social, or political preferences there
might be for this knowledge (see Shapin, 1996, p. 13). Here the dispassionate market assessment of the merchant is reflected in the objectivity sought by science;
this is further enabled by a mechanization of scholarly methods that sought toeliminate the role of human passions and interests (ibid). Artificially contrived
experiments were intended to produce new experiences with quality control of theemerging factual claims (ibid, p. 88). These particular experiences and facts weretaken as givens and foundations from which to inductively infer the theories ofnatural philosophy (ibid, p. 90). This is akin to the merchant taking market supply
and demand as givens separate from economic theories explaining underlying
market preferences and behaviour. Artificially contrived scientific experiments

The Role of the
Most Recent
Institutional Forms
in Creating New
Scholarly Partnerships

243

244

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

involved control, calculation of probabilities, the removal of subjective measures,and the seeking of regularities expressed in the language of mathematics (ibid, pp.
61, 96-101). These are akin to the quantitative mathematical measures associatedwith market pricing and market calculations of risk and profit associated with thesale of a product. The development of the Royal Society’s scientific journal, aptly
entitled the “Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society”, was also conceived
on a for-profit model.
Similarly, the RCE network creatively employs ideas associated with the voluntary
sector. The concept of sustainable development can be viewed as a political concept (Baker, 2006, p. 27) volunteered by the broader society as a result of politicalpolicy processes (see, for example, Annexe 2 of WCED, 1987, pp. 352-387). In
form-ing RCEs, organizational partners freely associate to advance the cause of
ESD while its regional boundaries are “volunteered” by ecological, cultural andlivelihood factors affecting community interest in participation. RCEs locally andglobally also self-structure to network on common sustainability themes (seeChapter 1 for the thematic areas of collaborative RCE work; see also Dahms etal., 2008 Table 2, p. 389). RCEs are required to mobilize most of their own resources of necessity requiring voluntary contributions by an RCE’s partners. The
openness required for voluntary resource mobilization extends to RCEs adopting
inclusive theoretical perspectives in their forms of knowledge production. These
inclusive forms include social learning, meta-learning (involving inter-personallearning between different groups), pluralistic approaches, transdisciplinary and/or problem-based approaches, and those involving learning by doing (Petry et al.,2011, p. 85). The research methods employed reflect grounded ways of knowing
based on volunteerism that mobilizes conceptual resources in particular contexts,
especially where there are a large number of variables and significant unknowns.12

The Participation of
Well-Established
Organizational
Forms

In addition, each multisectoral learning partnership being examined also receives
early support and scholarly objectives tied to well-established organizations fromthe respective time period; these organizations have a prominent role in providing
social support and maintaining social order. In the case of the Trilingual College thisrole was principally played by religious organizations, more specifically, the Christian church; in the case of the Royal Society this role was played by the aristocracy.
In the case of RCEs and contemporary society this social safety role is primarily
played by the state (for example, in terms of governmental social welfare functions,
its role in providing public infrastructure, and policing). In the case of religious
support for the Trilingual College, Jerome Busleyden, who posthumously financed

12 In such grounded methodologies (see Charmaz, 2004), communities themselves help shape theresearch enterprise by informing the concept of sustainable development, volunteering their own
definitions and meanings found when attempting to understand human well-being within a given
local context; indigenous and other forms of local knowledge related to human self-understanding
and ecosystems also supplement existing scientific knowledge. Organizational and individual members within the RCE region, both formal scholars and community members, are similarly mobilized
in a participatory way to contribute their own disciplinary and organizational understandings to theresearch endeavour. The transformative social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts of thisresearch can then be a basis for further study. A grounded case studies approach (see Berg, 2007, pp.
283-287) is frequently used by RCEs to the extent sustainable development strategies, especially thoseadvancing livelihoods in particular regions, are context sensitive. Comparisons between such casestudies can be applied at a variety of temporal and geographic scales, whether within or among RCEs.

Part IIIthe College, had an extensive career in the church serving as a parish-priest,
Archdeacon, ecclesiastical councillor and canon (DeVocht, 1951 vol. 1, p. 2; Neve,
1856, p. 42). Five of the six executors of his will also had ecclesiastical careers or
were associated with church-supported educational organizations (DeVocht, 1951,
vol. 1, pp. 50-55), the latter being something quite common in the medieval period(Shapin, 1996, p. 126).13 The Royal Society, on the other hand, relied considerably on the aristocracy, with resources from self-financed gentlemen scientists andoffices held by prominent lords, barons, and knights (Shapin, 1996, pp. 134-135).
Individual RCEs as self-organizing multisectoral regional entities often receive
some governmental support; it should be noted, however, that they also frequently
receive support from non-governmental sources and may intentionally strive to
be independent of government within their regions. They may also mobilize resources (both in-kind and financial) through organizational partners redirecting
and re-aligning their resources to ESD initiatives (versus financing the RCE directly as an external, separate entity).
Central research questions to be investigated by each new scholarly partnershipalso have been shaped by these organizational sectors with the goals of the Trilingual College reflecting extensively (though not exclusively) religious interests, theRoyal Society reflecting concerns of the nobility, and the RCE initiative reflecting
sustainable development research questions raised (or influenced) by governments with respect to development priorities. In the case of the Trilingual College,scholars were meant to study three languages ¬– Latin, Greek, and Hebrew – tohelp understand the books of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures in their original languages, and the writings of the early Church Fathers along with the classical cultural context in which these texts were written (DeVocht, 1951, vol 1, pp.
305, 309-310). Direct access to the original texts was viewed as allowing for a solid
linguistic interpretation and textual criticism that would overcome the errors oftranslators and copyists and, in turn, provide a preparatory basis for (and enhanced
study of) theology (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, pp. vi, 297, 304, 345). Jerome Busleyden,
its founder, wrote that the College was meant to “bring glory to God and to the
Church” (ibid, vol. 1, p. 23). With the Royal Society, the aims of the aristocracy werereflected in its traditional concerns for discovery of what was new, peculiar, rare,or unusual. This interest in what was new and rare was reflected in the “cabinetsof curiosities” fashionable among European gentlemen of the time (ibid, p. 90).
The Royal Society’s aims had been partially inspired by the writings of Sir Francis
Bacon that contained a general optimism about the possibility of discovering new
knowledge (Shapin, 1996, p. 20).Its aims also reflected the interests of the nobility in what was hidden and secret. Sir Robert Boyle, in his correspondence fromthe late 1640s prior to the formation of the Royal Society, refers to an associationof experimental philosophers known in his correspondence as “the Invisible College”. Aristocratic society at the time was also fascinated with the hidden featuresof constructed automatons that through internal mechanical movements imitatedhuman activities (ibid, p. 158).14 Just as the mechanical clocks (also popular at thetime) visibly showed the movement of a clock’s hands while its inner workings
13 The formative leaders of the College in its early stages, such as the famous humanist scholar
Desiderius Erasmus, also had backgrounds in the Christian church.
14 An early 18th century lecture by Marin Clare to the Royal Society focused on “the history of
automata... on the circulation of the blood ... [and] on magnetism” (Jacob, 1988, p. 146).

245

246

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Part III

were typically hidden, it was felt that the natural features of humans and animals(including their movement, digestive, and respiratory systems) and features of astronomy could similarly be explained by otherwise hidden mechanisms (ibid, pp.
32-36). From the perspective of scientific research, this meant going beyond mere
appearance and commonly observable qualities to discover the hidden secrets ofnature explained in terms of fewer and more basic qualities, frequently different
from those experienced in common experience (ibid, pp. 52-53). It also meantdeveloping specialized instrumentation that required focused training (such as
the microscope and telescope) to extend and improve the human senses (ibid, pp.
19, 93). The interest of the aristocracy in individualism and yet also, at the sametime, maintaining the social order and preventing radical reform could also be
usefully advanced by science.15 Lastly, the goal of sustainable development, andmore specifically of RCEs, reflects the interests of national governments that havemade various national and international commitments to ESD reflected in theirdecision to create the DESD in December 2002 (UN, 2003). It is in support ofthis Decade that UNU undertook the RCE initiative. State governments also haveconstitutional and other legal responsibilities (1) to regulate, conserve, and protect
environmental systems, (2) to promote literacy and support public education, and(3) to meet social responsibilities to the poor and the general citizenry throughsocial welfare systems and employment generation. These three goals are implicitin the concept of ESD that simultaneously seeks to promote educational strategies
to advance human well-being and healthy ecosystems.16 The institutional cultureof each of these three organizational forms also helps shape the structure of eachnew partnership.
Despite these organizational influences on the culture of the new scholarly structures, the cultures of each supporting group (church, aristocracy, and state government, respectively) are also creatively challenged. New forms of inclusivenesspush the boundaries of their traditional domains enabling innovation. While religion plays a key role in reinforcing ethnicity and culture, the Trilingual Colleges
challenged Western Europe by introducing the study of classical Latin along withGreek and Hebrew, which enabled a re-interpretation of the meaning of religious
scriptures and a re-discovery of classical, pre-Christian culture.17 The Royal Society
advanced not only the specialized interests of the noble elites (who saw themselves
as set apart culturally from the commoners), but initially focused on the scientificstudy and refinement of the skills of ordinary craftspeople (Shapin, 1996, p. 139).

15 Science, on the one hand, powerfully challenged previous knowledge that had been accepted purely on the basis of authority and tradition; at the same time it provided a new, commonly acceptable
platform for knowledge (for those willing to follow the scientific method), one not prejudiced byreligion and politics – topics not allowed for discussion at meetings of the Royal Society (ibid, 135; see
Jacob, 1988, p. 78). Other scholarly pursuits in the Royal Society were tied to earlier interests of thenobility such as attempting to turn base metals into gold and the art of flying (Shapin, 1996, p. 140).
16 Governments also aim to create conditions for their leaders (and citizens more generally) to exercise power and planning over the long-term requiring relative stability or, at least, predictability. Theselong-term time horizons are also implicit in sustainable development’s focus on meeting the needs
and aspirations of future generations.
17 Science, on the one hand, powerfully challenged previous knowledge that had been accepted purely on the basis of authority and tradition; at the same time it provided a new, commonly acceptable
platform for knowledge (for those willing to follow the scientific method), one not prejudiced byreligion and politics – topics not allowed for discussion at meetings of the Royal Society (ibid, 135; see
Jacob, 1988, p. 78). Other scholarly pursuits in the Royal Society were tied to earlier interests of thenobility such as attempting to turn base metals into gold and the art of flying (Shapin, 1996, p. 140).

247

248

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Finally, RCEs, due to their novel geographic boundaries (shaped by ecological regions, livelihoods, transportation, and cultural patterns) typically cut across traditional political jurisdictions; this requires the networking of multiple scales ofgovernmental authorities (including cities, rural municipalities, states/provinces,countries, and international governmental bodies such as the UN). At the sametime, the interdisciplinary nature of ESD requires ongoing inter-departmental
networking within each government. Lastly, any centralized direction of RCEs isalways in the context of being attentive to what is desired in a region around ESD;
given the RCEs’ governance basis in volunteerism, this requires gentle, facilitative
leadership that empowers and links partner organizations around common research efforts versus the exercise of centralized coercive power by the state.

Institutional Support One of the primary strengths of these new multisectoral learning organizationsat Larger Geographic is their ability to generate new knowledge based on integrating information, reScales: Bishops,
search, and knowledge dissemination over larger geographic scales (whether aParliament, andbishop’s diocese versus a local parish, a national House of Lords versus the land
the UNholdings of a local lord, or the global UN system versus an individual national

government). This scholarly activity over larger territories is enabled by a further
kind of organizational involvement, specifically organizations operating at larger
geographic scales yet associated with each of the previously mentioned institutional forms (church, aristocracy, and state) in the given time period. In the caseof the Trilingual College of Leuven, its history is connected with the support ofhigher religious offices such as bishops and their role in geographically integrating larger ecclesiastical territories. For example, not only is Jerome Busleyden’s
ecclesiastical career an example, but his elder brother served as the Archbishop of
Besançon (De Vocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. 2). The Bishop of Vienna, a friend of Erasmus,
established his own trilingual college (to which he donated his library), while afurther friend of Erasmus, Richard Fox, the Bishop of Winchester, established
Corpus Christi College in Oxford on a humanist foundation (ibid, vol. 2, p.356).
The Royal Society, on the other hand, was associated with the national institutions of Parliament (comprised of the House of Lords (including representationof the nobility) and the House of Commons). The inspiration for the Royal Society
was tied to a period of civil war against the king with support for parliament andnon-absolutist government at the time being shared among natural philosophersand others engaged in scientific experimentation (Jacob, 1988, pp. 75, 93).18 Finally, the RCE initiative is a global initiative through its institutional dedication
to the goals of the DESD and the institutional direction and support of the UNU.
Here the UN can be thought of institutionally as a government organization to
the extent it acts as a “government of governments”. These organizational forms
operating at a larger geographic scale (as before, whether a bishop’s diocese versus
a local parish, a national House of Lords versus the land holdings of a local lord,or the global UN system versus an individual national government) provide not
only support and protection for these new forms of scholarship, but also a generalform of social legitimation.19 In addition, these larger organizational forms also
18 Margaret Jacob sees “the natural philosophy inherent in [Sir Isaac] Newton’s science as themetaphysical foundations of the Whig constitution” (ibid, p. 138). Sir Isaac Newton himself was latera member of parliament.
19 In the case of RCEs, for example, the importance of their association with the United Nations
often plays a role in the ability of RCEs to mobilize support in their respective regions and to network
internationally.

Part IIIassist in generating important questions that can be addressed by the new formsof scholarship afforded by these scholarly partnerships. The humanist scholarshipof the Trilingual Colleges, for example, provided important scriptural knowledge
to inform ecclesiastical debates, especially those associated with the Protestant
Reformation of the 16th century. The scientific scholarship of the Royal Society wasbrought to bear in addressing questions raised by parliament and its government
agencies (Jacob, 1988, p. 92). RCEs are structured to address research questions
raised by the DESD, and are also poised to address specific questions raised by UN
agencies such as UNESCO, UNICEF and UNDP, among others.
The larger geographic scales afforded by the association of these new scholarly
partnerships provides a distinctive platform for innovation and resource-sharingthat would otherwise not be possible at such a scale (see Box 10.2). Lastly, the institutional dynamics of these organizational forms operating at larger territorial
scales also seem to be somewhat emulated within these new partnerships. For
example, the Trilingual College innovated with the formation of specific financed
academic chairs in each of the three languages (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. 13); thesechairs perhaps reflected the cathedra (Latin for “chair”) or the bishop’s throne thatsymbolized the bishop’s authority to teach. The Royal Society structured itself asa self-governing fellowship with a presidency, perhaps emulating the workings ofa Parliament with its own Prime Minister. The UN culture and structure are evident in global RCE meetings that occur annually, while some RCEs are notable for
employing UN concepts, such as having general assemblies, within their regions.
The culture of the UN associated with its being a non-European, post-colonial, global institution also contributes to the potential for RCEs to have a more inclusive
approach to knowledge production.

The previous analysis has shown the key institutional and organizational role ofhigher education in these multisectoral learning partnerships; the innovative useof ideas and institutions from the newest institutional sector of the time in devising
their models of research and scholarly governance; and the role of those organizations engaged in providing social support and maintaining the social order indevising research questions, conducting transformative education and providing
initial supports. Yet these multisectoral learning partnerships are also noteworthy
for their openness to the participation of further organizational forms, particularly
those engaged in the dominant or primary forms of livelihood practices during
the time period and upon which the learning partnerships have considerable impact over the long-term. A key difference between each organization is the type ofsystems of production (and resulting livelihoods) dominating during each period,
with the Trilingual Colleges emerging in a period with resources brokered among
elite aristocratic families, the Royal Society with strong state systems of tributepaid to and dispensed by centralized authorities (e.g. monarchies), and RCEs withthe global dominance of market organizations and industrial production systems.
At the same time, each organization makes compelling appeals to these livelihood
systems. The humanist education of the Trilingual College appealed to membersof the aristocracy, administrators and other professionals. The Royal Society formally engaged state power, specifically that of the monarchy, when King Charles
II gave it a Royal Charter. The Royal Society also had significant benefits for both

Openness andSupport for
Organizations
Engaged in Primary
Livelihood Practices

249

250

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

governments and the merchant class with the advent of the Industrial Revolution.
Finally, RCEs themselves are notable for their diverse participation that includes
those engaged in market-based livelihood practices (e.g. small, medium and large
businesses and cooperatives), non-governmental organizations, schools, faith organizations and members of the general public.
It should be noted that specific benefits were thought to accrue to organizations
engaged in the dominant livelihood practices of the day by the respective founders of the new scholarly partnerships. Erasmus, in his work “The Education ofa Christian Prince” (1516), extolled the virtues of a humanist education for thearistocracy at a time when universities were primarily dominated by priests andother church officials. In terms of supporting aristocratic values, Erasmus andothers viewed the study of classical languages as promoting eloquence and the“pleasing expression” of ideas (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. 157), something that would
benefit those of higher social standing. In addition, a humanist education was
thought to create virtue and produce civic utility through the direct study of religious scriptures and other classical works that offered practical ethical instruction(Shapin, 1996, p. 127). Nicolas Vernulaeus noted the success of the Trilingual
College stating, “There has not been during these hundred years in any part ofthe commonwealth any one of any renown or any doctrine, who has not been a
disciple in this College, which is in fact the Palaestra of Princes, of Nobility andof Great Men” (cited in DeVocht, 1951, vol.1, p.1). In the case of the Royal Society,
Sir Francis Bacon, whose work “The New Atlantis” (1627) envisioned scientificinquiry and inspired the formation of the Royal Society, viewed the rise of scienceas having significant benefits for the state. In this work, the king of an imagined
land establishes “Salomon’s House” that does research to extend natural philosophy (science) and expand state power. In this imagined house, scientific labs were
populated by government officials (Shapin, 1996, p. 130).
Despite relatively minimal support of the monarchy for the Royal Society in its
early stages, the Society proved to have significant benefits to the state akin to
those envisioned by Bacon. Its scientific discoveries in geography and navigation
advanced British military power and trade, specifically at sea (see Jacob, 1988, p.
64). Scientific innovations also helped advance industry and agriculture with newmechanical devices, which produced wealth that was deemed to promote general utility that, in turn, supported social order (ibid, pp. 30-31, 92). Science also
provided a basis for shared beliefs after Europe’s centuries of religious sectarianism (Shapin, 1996, pp. 122-125). The RCE network in its early stages has alsosought to advance sustainable development for market-based livelihood activities.
This has included specific work at its global conferences focusing on the topics of
SCP as well as specific initiatives in this area at a regional level to create market
opportunities (see Fadeeva, Payyappallimana & Petry, 2012; Chapters 3 and 4).
More generally, the RCE network has significant opportunities for benefiting
business (see Box 10.3).

Part III

251

252

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

Benefits to Newer
Organizational
Forms

Worthy of note are the benefits that each multisectoral scholarly partnership has
had for those organizational forms that were the newest or the most cutting edge
in a given time period: in the case of the Trilingual College, the growing role of thestate and government; in the case of the Royal Society, the emerging productiverole of the merchant or business class; and in the case of RCEs, an increasing productive role for the not-for-profit or voluntary sector. In the case of governments,
the study of Latin and Greek through the Trilingual College was important inunderstanding elements of earlier judicial systems of the Roman Empire (such as
the Codex Justinianus and the Codex Theodosianus), which, in turn, was importantto the revival of the study of law in the West and the rise of state authority (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. vi). Students of the Trilingual College also filled the demand
for secretaries and advisers to the state, and for school masters by towns (ibid, p.
239). In the case of the Royal Society, from 1660 there had been a commitmentof the Society to be useful to trade and industry, which included developing thescientific knowledge needed for many significant industrial innovations (Jacob,
1998, p. 130). Its success is perhaps reflected in there being more than 100 working steam engines in Britain by 1730 (ibid.). Finally, RCEs, with their emphasis
on sustaining human well-being and ecosystem health as goals of sustainable development, can play a central role in advancing the objectives of not-for-profit
human service agencies and environmental non-governmental organizations. In
doing so, RCEs also build community capacity for increased volunteerism.

Innovations in
Knowledge Sharing

With new forms of knowledge production also come innovations in the formsof knowledge dissemination. In terms of written or otherwise codified knowledge,
the Trilingual College advanced the authentication and publication of complete
classical works versus earlier incomplete compilations (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p.
191); old manuscripts in European libraries were also itemized and catalogued,
a practice of Busleyden (the College’s benefactor) during his lifetime (ibid, vol. 1,
pp. 3-4). Experiments of the Royal Society were recorded in minute detail to enable replication by others; these scientific materials, methods and findings werethen published in the first scientific journals (Shapin, 1996, pp. 107-108). Many
RCEs seek to document and study existing and evolving educational practices forsustainable development in their respective communities, finding ways to store
and manage this content in online and other formats for a diversity of community
users, both within and outside higher education. At the same time, each educational partnership develops new ways for sharing experiential knowledge (i.e. knowhow or tacit knowledge). As previously discussed, the Trilingual College pioneered
free lectures on languages that were open to all members of the university without
these lectures being part of any set curriculum or being focused on a particular
practical aim (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. vi). The Royal Society held performances of
specialized experiments at its meetings where the audience acted as witnesses tothese experiments (Shapin, 1996, p. 107). Many RCEs have taken a decentralized
approach to knowledge production and are in the process of creating regional learning spaces or “living laboratories” where various alternative livelihood practices(tied to traditional knowledge, local community history, locally available materials,
and learning opportunities associated within a given ecosystem) can be studied
by multiple educational sectors (e.g. school systems, universities, technical andvocational institutes, and the general public; see, for example, Fadeeva et al., 2012,

Part IIICh. 5). In terms of diffusion of new knowledge, what is also notable is the relatively rapid rate at which this occurs in these new scholarly partnerships that, inturn, helps prove their social usefulness in their formative years.20
The previous analysis suggests that organizational innovation through the forma- Concludingtion of new multisectoral learning organizations outside the traditional academy Reflections(specifically the Trilingual College of Leuven, Belgium (1517), the Royal Society of London (1660), and UNU’s RCE initiative (2005)) have played (or in the case of RCEs
may potentially play) a central role in creating and formalizing research and disseminating new forms of knowledge (in this case, humanistic knowledge, scientificknowledge, and knowledge for sustainable development respectively). These twoearlier knowledge systems, in turn, played a crucial role in moving to new systems
of production (such as the industrial revolution in the case of scientific knowledge). The RCEs share important institutional parallels with these two earlier multisectoral learning partnerships suggesting that the global RCE network could play
an important role in advancing sustainable development on a global scale.
These historic parallels with earlier scholarly networks also point to the scholarly
potential of the RCE initiative in pioneering new forms of knowledge production for higher education organizations including advancing their educational goals and those of other organizations (such as the UN). The preceding analysis
suggests that considerable institutional complexity underlies these new scholarly partnerships. Such complexity possibly constrains the range of new forms ofscholarly institutions that can emerge and be successful in globally advancing
sustainability in a timely, efficient, and effective way, especially in light of significant global institutional and resource constraints. Lastly, it points to the potential
value of participation by a range of organizational sectors (perhaps, most especially, business and the voluntary sector) in specific RCEs and the RCE initiative moregenerally, in order to advance their own organizational possibilities in times ofincreasing uncertainty and resource constraints.

20 In the case of the Trilingual College of Leuven, Jerome Busleyden died in August, 1517, and already by October of that year, Erasmus had engaged the executors of Busleyden’s will to hire a professorof Greek and of Hebrew to give lectures at the university (DeVocht, 1951, vol. 1, p. 60). The publication of the first scientific journal, the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society began within five
years of its founding. Many RCEs within a year or so of their acknowledgement by UNU have alreadyestablished their own websites and content management systems for documenting and sharing
knowledge within their respective RCEs and between RCEs. Many also engage in mapping ESD projects in their region. In a short time period, extensive work has also been done to create global portals
for RCE knowledge-sharing. Many traditional academic publications in established academic journals
have also emerged from the work of RCEs.

253

254

Chapter 10 Advancing ESD through New Multisectoral Learning Partnerships

References
Baker, S. (2006). Sustainable development. London:
Routledge.
Berg, B.L. (2007). Qualitative research methods
for the social sciences. (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson
Education.
Charmaz, K. (2004). Grounded theory. In S.N.
Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research: A reader on theory and practice(pp. 496-521). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeVocht, H. (1951). History of the foundation and therise of the Collegium Trilingue Lovaniense 1517-1550,
Volumes 1-4. Leuven: Publications Universitaires deLeuven.
Ember, C. R. & Ember, M. (1996). Anthropology.
(8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fadeeva, Z., Payyappallimana, U. & Petry, R. (Eds.).
(2012). Towards more sustainable consumption andproduction systems and sustainable livelihoods. Yokohama: United Nations University, 2012. Retrieved
March 24, 2014, from http://www.ias.unu.edu/
resource_centre/Final%20FULL%20UNU%20
SCP%20Booklet%20Single%20Pages.pdf
Gresham College. (2014). History of Gresham College. Retrieved March 21, 2014, from http://www.
gresham.ac.uk/about-us/history-of-gresham-college/
history-of-gresham-college
Jacob, M.C. (1988). The cultural meaning of the scientific revolution. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington,
DC: Island Press.

Nève , F. (1856). De l‘enseignement des lettres a l‘Université de Leuven: Collège des Trois Langues. Brussels:
The Royal Academy of Belgium.
Petry, R.A., Fadeeva, Z., Fadeeva, O., Hasslof, H.,
Hellstrom, A., Hermans, J., Mochizuki, Y. & Sonesson, K. (2011). Educating for sustainable production
and consumption and sustainable livelihoods:
Learning from multi-stakeholder networks.
Sustainability Science, 6, 83-96.
Shapin, S. (1996). The scientific revolution. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
United Nations. (2003). Resolution adopted by theGeneral Assembly: 57/254 United Nations Decade of
Education for Sustainable Development. Retrieved
March 21, 2014, from http://www.un-documents.
net/a57r254.htm
United Nations University. (2012a). United Nations
University: About UNU. Retrieved March 21, 2014,
from http://unu.edu/about/unu
United Nations University. (2012b). United Nations University 2011 annual report. Tokyo: United
Nations University. Retrieved March 21, 2014,
from http://i.unu.edu/media/unu.edu/annual_reports/000/024/173/unu_ar2011_en.pdf
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Young, O.R. (2002). The institutional dimensionsof environmental change: Fit, interplay, and scale.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Zacour, N. (1975). Introduction to medieval institutions. (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin‘s Press.

Part III255

© Wolfgang Staudt, CC BY - SA 2.0.

256Part IIISupporting Smarter Development
through Knowledge-based
Collaboration
Stephanie Hodge
UNICEF, Chair of the UN Interagency Committee for the DESD 2009, 2013

As Chair of the DESD in 2009 and 2013 and throughout six years’ work with theInteragency Committee (a highly motivated and committed group of UN partners) on implementing the DESD, I had the pleasure of close association with the
UNU-led global network of RCEs. This network was initiated at the beginning of
the DESD to implement what is embodied by ESD. Growing and investing in thisnetwork is supporting transformation towards sustainable development at scale.
I participated in two RCE network annual conferences – Kerkrade, Netherlands,
2011, and Barcelona, Spain, 2010; and in a regional meeting of the RCE networkof the Americas in Peru in 2013. I also had the privilege to be invited to present at
a special RCE seminar session during the 5th Tokyo International Conference on
African Development (TICAD V) at UNU in Japan in 2013. These engagements
made me an avid supporter of the network. I believe in its vision, its knowledge
and learning mandate, and its multistakeholder membership in the context of
doing development better.
We all know that business-as-usual has not been a sustainable pathway for development. The traditional economic planning framework has been shortsighted.
A progressive sustainable economic development framework from which to monitor or evaluate sustainable development is the Inclusive Wealth (IW) framework.
IW’s expanded vision rests on the premise that development is sustainable if thevalue of its capital assets does not decline (Clark, 2014). The IW framework includes
five capitals which hold risks inherent to overall global progress, productivity
and livelihoods: 1) natural capital, 2) human capital, 3) manufactured capital, 4)
knowledge capital, and 5) social capital. The framework factors in the major development concerns, which include environmental externalities, knowledge, humanand social equity, capacities and capital.
I view the work of RCEs through this progressive sustainable development framework. The RCE network is more than a network for development. It has a membership that includes like-minded persons and a constituency that puts a premium
on knowledge capital in development. Knowledge in development as a concept wasborn in the mid-20th century. In the 1950s, UNESCO coined the phrase “infor-

257

258

mation famine” in reference to the gap between the information rich (developed
countries) and the information poor (developing and third world countries); during the 1970s and 80s, the same problem was leveraged as the “global digital
divide” (Hamelink, 2002). These concepts are linked to the ability of economies
or countries to invest in research and learning opportunities, including applied work,with universities for development planning – an ability which requires access to resources, an infrastructure to create new knowledge or research, and the understanding of this evidence base to effectively apply and utilize it. A related concept isknowledge management which, simply expressed, means “managing (and learning) through the effective application of knowledge”. Systems for managing
knowledge effectively for development are called “learning systems”. Based on
more than 20 years of work experience on sustainable development with the UN
and its partners, I believe the key to sustainable development for all is access toknowledge and the ability to use it effectively. It is about knowledge management
and knowledge facilitation to build human and social capital.
The consideration of knowledge inputs, needs and gaps is inherent in all sustainable development, but this consideration alone is not enough. The work of sustainable development must also be inclusive, with a representative mix of people
who represent and provide knowledge inputs from all of society: civil society, private sector, science, policy, different cultures and groups, youth, women and children. There must be a quality assurance system in place for inclusive and sustainable development planning. There must be a science and evidence base, and also
the right mix for ascertaining the important baselines for measuring local results,
namely, participation, environment, social and political inputs for better design,monitoring and development management, and adaptive livelihoods initiatives.
When evidence-based knowledge and systemic learning for change are considered from this perspective (as inputs or capitals in terms of our productive base), it
adds an instrumental value of including “knowledge (traditional and science based) and learning and a learning-systems approach” in all development planningand interventions.
RCEs fulfill a missing piece of the SD puzzle for sustainability – local ownershipof issues and facilitation of learning and action. It is the essential component for
dynamic environmental and ecosystems management and towards a longer-termsustainable development objective. The RCE network puts a premium on local
knowledge, knowledge capture, knowledge-sharing and local learning, which inturn promote local empowerment, stronger evidence-based development decisions and positive collaborative actions.
The evolution of the RCE network is a timely global movement with a multistakeholder membership uniquely led, in most cases, by education institutions. With
education and knowledge at the core of its learning, capacity-building and sustainable development approach, the network’s orientation is the right mix needed fortransformative change. At the forefront of an RCE’s unique mandate is its work on
capacity strengthening at three levels – individual, organizational and systemic.
It is also about promoting local leadership for empowering action through knowledge and learning.

Part IIIThe RCEs have a non-hierarchical multistakeholder membership with local, regional and global nodes equally supported by institutions of learning and local
governments. While all nodes are important for information dissemination andbuilding new knowledge and collaboration, the local level nodes are most powerfulfor leveraging bottom-up change in development practices, as they promote collaboration and are knowledge brokers. They seek out the local knowledge owners –civil society and youth in particular. For youth the network plays a special role,
filling a huge global void. Universities, which form a sizable portion of RCE membership, are the places where youth live, convene and organize. RCE networks globally are providing a platform for youth to organize around sustainability issues
through multistakeholder engagement. RCEs bring in the right mix for local
planning and actions around sustainable development. The key is engaging theleadership from the institutions of learning that in turn empower government
departments and other local stakeholders to work collaboratively on sustainability
issues. And no matter what the local challenges are, tapping the knowledge powerof the capacity-strengthening network that facilitates partnerships is what is needed
to support sustainable development, and that is at the core of the RCE network’s
mandate.
The network promotes the still necessary triangular and south-south cooperation.
It also promotes regional and global technology transfer, facilitates and bridges
unconventional partnerships, and includes universities and youth in development
planning. It highlights the importance of the inclusion of local and traditional
knowledge, supports diversity and youth empowerment and organization, andpromotes smarter development choices. RCEs are the local centres for knowledge,
teaching, ideas and action on sustainable development; building local capacities
for long-term sustainable development management; and creating a unique multistakeholder partnership that enables people to get involved in solving problems
and developing systems for what promises to be a dynamic and more sustainable
future.

References

Clark, W. (2014). Special Lecture on Sustainability.
Harvard Kennedy School Ideascape, May 2014.

Hamelink, C. J. (2002). Social development,
information and knowledge: Whatever happened
to communication? Society for International
Development, 45 (4), 5-9.

259

© Wolfgang Staudt, CC BY - SA 2.0

260

Part IIIRCEs: The IAU Perspective
Dzukifli Abdul Razak
President, International Association of Universities, Paris
Founder-Convener of RCE Penang, Malaysia

The RCE network, launched in Nagoya at the start of the DESD, was a bold andforward-looking initiative. The brainchild of UNU-IAS, the RCE network quickly
gained acceptance internationally as evidenced by the numbers of RCEs established – from a mere seven pioneering RCEs at the beginning of the Decade in2005 to nearly 130 in 2014. This has enabled ESD to be recognized globally as thecornerstone of education of the future. The RCEs, of which several stakeholders
are active members of the International Association of Universities (IAU), havedemonstrated their relevance as well as flexibility to be inclusive in pursuing thegoals of sustainable development.
This is indeed a very fundamental change from the current approach in educationthat is stifled by siloed thinking, resulting in fragmented and compartmentalized
actions, if at all. This approach fails to capture the essentials of sustainable development that is all all-encompassing and cross-sectoral in nature. The RCE is potentially an alternative institution that is more conducive to being the platform thatrecognizes multistakeholder partnerships allowing for the adoption of a more systematic transdisciplinary thinking in the quest for a comprehensive understanding of the issues at hand. The solutions to be arrived at need to allow for the interlinking of different entities at various levels – local, national, regional and global
on the one hand, and people, planet, prosperity and politics on the other. The new
approach is about complementarity rather than competition; about the whole,rather than the particular; and about the well-being of community as opposedto that of an individual or a select few. Ultimately, it is about convergence of knowledge and know-how.
In the case of RCEs, the convergence is achieved through interlinkages among
varied knowledge entities. Interlinking can be operationalized in at least three very
different ways, namely: vertically, between different levels of formal educational
and knowledge-based institutions; horizontally, between formal educational and/or knowledge-based organizations of the same level; and laterally or diagonally,
involving other types of organizations (including educational and knowledgebased) that advocate ESD in more non-formal or informal ways. The resultant of

261

262

the interlinkages can lay a firm ground for the emergence of sustainability-led institutions and communities as alternatives for the new millennium in the attempt
to change the status quo. Stepwise, this can lead to the clustering of RCEs (forming Regional Clusters of Expertise) based on common themes and knowledge,
and not confined to just locale.
Understood and shaped this way, the RCE is transformational in its mission andfuturistic in its orientation. Ushered in on transdisciplinary modalities, it helps tocreate new and innovative vistas for a more proficient higher education system in
the age of sustainability. Institutions are no longer ivory towers, but engaged in
improving the quality of life by centring on human dignity based on humanitarianvalues. In other words, education is no longer confined only to measuring tangibles
for ascertaining its real worth, but also the intangibles which are complementary
to the former in ensuring that values basic to building positive relationships
and partnerships (for example, trust) are not compromised. It has been highlighted
that unless the relationships between human beings and nature, and the partnerships among fellow humans are solidly rooted, sustainable development can be
an uphill task.
In many respects, the RCE experiment resonates strongly with organizations
like the IAU. Founded in 1950 under the auspices of UNESCO as the leading
global association of HEIs, IAU aspires to build a worldwide higher education
community where the state of relationships and partner-ships are pivotal. In
fact, IAU believes in strengthening academic solidarity among HEIs by promoting cooperation and collaboration instead of competition. Secondly, because
IAU members come from diverse regions (more than 130 countries), actions oncommon priorities are vital to strongly reflect genuine inclusiveness and sensitivities in voicing the needs of a globalized higher education and articulating issues of shared interest and concerns. Notable among these are upholding thevalues of academic freedom and institutional autonomy while promoting greater
accountability, and having sustainable development as the overarching goal of
education in the 21st century and beyond.
Finally, as IAU is values-based, among its aims is to promote, through teaching
and research, the principles of freedom and social justice, of human dignity andsolidarity. IAU contributes to these principles by strengthening international cooperation among universities and through partnerships between key HEIs andother stakeholders. Indeed, it encourages institutions to develop their own policies
and strategies based on guidelines developed by IAU following widespread
consultations, including on ESD (see http://www.iau-aiu.net/content/sustainabledevelopment, especially the IAU ESD Portal).

Part III

More specifically, in line with the ideals of RCEs, IAU (a) upholds the fundamental principles for which every university should stand, namely, the right to pursue
knowledge for its own sake, and to promote and uphold the tolerance of divergent
opinion as well as freedom from political interference; (b) promotes equitable access, success and equal opportunities for students, researchers, faculty and staff;(c) contributes to the development of knowledge, higher education and research in
public interest; (d) encourages the pursuit of diversity and quality while respecting
cultural differences, and (e) strengthens academic solidarity among HEIs while
promoting cooperation rather than competition. In short, IAU complements thefour main thrusts of ESD that are embedded in the operations of RCEs, namely, to(1) improve access to quality education, (2) re-orient existing education to address
sustainable development, (3) develop public understanding and awareness, and(4) provide training programs for all sectors of society, private and public alike.
In the final analysis, IAU shares the aspiration to co-create a Global Learning Space(which overlaps with IAU’s vision of “building a worldwide higher education
community”) for Sustainable Development as spelled out in the UNU-IAS (2005)
document Mobilising for Education for Sustainable Development: Towards a Global
Learning Space based on Regional Centres of Expertise. Indeed, Hans van Ginkel,
then Rector of UNU (who is also a former IAU President) wrote, “RCEs together
and their mutual relations would form the Global Learning Space for Sustainable
Development – the major outcome of DESD”; more so with the impending formation of RCEs as clusters rather than centres as the next step. As stated in the document, higher education plays a vital role in shaping the future by educating theprofessionals of tomorrow. Given the emerging challenges such as globalizationthat have the potential to undo what has been achieved so far by the RCEs, higher
education must address issues inherent in the quest for a sustainable future if the
Global Learning Space is to be a reality.
This is where the thrust to transform and re-orient education towards ESD is imperative by purveying the “right” knowledge, principles, skills and values that subscribe to the sustainability worldview. In order to live sustainably, the vital elements
of moderation and balance (as in all organic systems) must be the guiding principles
of sustainable livelihoods. This can be traced back to the sustainable societies of yesteryears anchored in indigenous wisdom that respects relationships and partnerships in adopting sustainability as a way of life. In no uncertain terms, relationships and partnerships are regarded as part of the sacred, violating which will
result in dire consequences, as we see and experience today. In modern times
this can only be possible if the same respect for relationships is accorded among
the various knowledge-based entities and disciplines by making them whole once
again in a convergence that gives deeper meaning to sustainability as a major
tenet for 21st century living.

263

264

Through successful initiatives like the RCEs, the time has come to reclaim theethos of education that regards people as valued members of the global community, and is anchored to values to nourish humanity as its core responsibility andpurpose in the 21st century. This can be the first step to transcend the current
marketplace logic and practices that distort education as no more than a cog in a
dysfunctional, mechanized world dictated by unsustainable modes of thinking.
For instance, the trend to corporatize and commoditize education by subscribing
to the hallmark of so-called competitive benchmarking, ranking and marketability
has demeaned the authority and deep-seated purpose of education to such an extent that university education, in particular, has been rendered unsustainable as it
is drawn into the web of the “education-industry complex” – an analogy similar toEisenhower’s “military-industrial complex”. The consequences too are equally devastating on a global scale, as clearly demonstrated by many longstanding, almost
intractable global divides, disparities and cultural insensitivities giving rise to amyriad of potential conflicts and tensions that could threaten the Global Learning
Space as an outcome of the DESD.
To conclude, while it is vital to recognize the achievements of the RCEs in pushing
the agenda for change through ESD, the full impact of it all will not be felt until
the global demands of being more equitable, inclusive and balanced is achieved
with the Global Learning Space for Sustainable Development. This is where IAU
can be a strong partner, taking RCEs to the next level.

© pclvv, CC BY - SA 2.0

Part III265

© Pablo F. J., CC BY - SA 2.0

266

Part IIIRCEs: From a Dream to Reality
Hans van Ginkel
Fourth Rector (1997 – 2007), United Nations University
Honorary Professor, Utrecht University

In 2000, while we were preparing for the World Summit on Sustainable Develop- Dreams
ment, the idea of the RCEs seemed like an unrealistic dream, maybe something fora very distant future. The idea grew out of many thoughts and processes including
the Lüneburg Declaration (2001) where the idea of regional centres was launched
for the first time. Now, 15 years later, no less than 129 officially acknowledged andactive RCEs in 50 countries have become a reality, proving that dreams can cometrue when they are systematically pursued in concrete, realistic steps and with thesupport and hard work of many dedicated initiators all around the world. Dreams,
visions, ideas, creativity are all based on diverse and challenging experiences. They
are rooted in a strong sense of belonging, of responsibility, in a strong belief thatthe future can be different and better. But that can happen only when we makeit different and when we are able to motivate others as well to contribute – theirideas, convictions, creativity and willingness to achieve a better world and a moresustainable future.
I was lucky to have many diverse opportunities to gain valuable experiences in a Experiences
range of functions and positions in my active working life. I started as a youngteacher of geography and history in a secondary school. Then I became, at Utrecht
University, a teacher trainer as well as an author of school curricula and examination programs. Being heavily involved in all these activities I realized that all school
subjects were developed independently, without giving any attention to the ways
in which they were related and could support each other. Even in the same subject
area there was very little awareness of what happens in other school types or atother school levels. I became more and more convinced that it is crucial to link the
programs with each other in different subject areas, in different school types andat different levels. It is obvious that much improvement is possible and necessary
to make education, as we know it, a much more useful learning experience.
In my research and in field work with students I gained other experiences. In
the valleys of the Alps in Austria, cities in the socialist countries of Central andEast-ern Europe and Southeast Asia, and suburbs in the peat and clay areas in the

267

268

Randstad Holland, it became clear to me that environment, development, society
and, therefore, sustainability are very different topics and ideas in different places
and regions, raising very different issues and challenges and presenting very different opportunities to address these. Because of my interest in planning anddevelopment issues, I also became increasingly involved in administrative issues
and was invited to chair the meetings of the City of Utrecht, 12 smaller municipalities, the province and the relevant national ministries on physical planning forthe central part of the country. That is how I became convinced that universities
must contribute their expertise and knowledge actively to the development of theirown city and region.
The logical next step in my professional life was to get involved in university administration. In fact, in part this came in parallel to my activities for the city andregion. In line with my interests and orientation, I soon became responsible forthe international cooperation activities of Utrecht University, then of the European Universities, and then also of the International Association of Universities.
Just by chance I discovered that the preparatory meeting for the founding of the
IAU (Nice, 1950) had been held at Utrecht University in 1948 and immediately I
felt committed. I then had the good luck of being picked in 1987 by Prof. Giuseppe
Caputo (1936-91), vice-rector of the University of Bologna, to be a member of theteam of authors of the Magna Charta Universitatum released at the 900th anniversary of the University in 1988.

A BreakthroughThe Magna Charta is, to my knowledge, the first document that clearly hints at
issues that we regard now as the basis of education for sustainable development.
It was also the most successful of all declarations: it was signed in 1988 by 430
university rectors and presidents, and by now has been signed by 756 from 80
different countries. In the preamble, the Magna Charta (1988) already states that:… the universities’ task of spreading knowledge among the younger generation implies that, in today’s world, they must also serve society as a whole, and that thecultural, social and economic future of society requires, in particular, a considerable investment in continuing education … universities must give future generations
education and training that will teach them, and through them others, to respect thegreat harmonies of their natural environment and of life itself.
Also in 1987 and 1988 the concerns of the member universities in Poland, theBaltic and the Danube regions induced the Conference of European Rectors (CRE,
now European University Association (EUA)) to develop a program comparable
to the Erasmus Programme, to enhance international cooperation and student
mobility that would be open to universities and students in Central and Eastern
Europe and be focused on topics related to environment, pollution and sustainable development. The name chosen was Copernicus (COoperation Programme
in Europe for Research on Nature and Industry through Coordinated University
Studies), after the Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus. The Copernicus Programme was quite successful in the 1990s, thanks partly to a substantial financial
contribution of the Swedish government. It focused on specific activities of importance, in particular, for the universities in the former socialist countries. For
instance, new university-level handbooks were prepared on some very new topics

Part IIIin a post-socialist reality, namely, environmental law and environmental economics.
For a number of years Copernicus also organized summer courses in Budapest on
these issues. Many universities in Europe also began to improve their programswith regard to environmental issues. At Utrecht we developed what is now theleading institute in the Netherlands on energy and sustainability – the Copernicus
Institute. Copernicus was very active, but late, with developing its charter. Thiswas only presented in 1993, in fact challenged by the International Chamber ofCommerce (also located in Geneva, like the Conference of European Rectors) that
presented its charter in 1991. At present, Copernicus works as an effective network organization (Copernicus Alliance). It also gave rise to the Baltic University
Program; again with significant support from the Swedish government.
In the university world the first major declaration, the Talloires Declaration, camefrom Tufts University in 1990. This was soon followed by others such as Swansea,
Halifax, IAU’s Kyoto Declaration and the Copernicus Charter (for an overview ofthese declarations see the IAU website). The years leading up to Johannesburg(WSSD 2002) experienced an upsurge of renewed activity in the world of higher
education. For the first time the higher education community from around theworld came together at the Copernicus meeting in Lüneburg to jointly preparea clear input to the WSSD. Two crucial decisions were taken by the participants
representing the Global Higher Education for Sustainability Partnership (IAU,
Copernicus, University Leaders for a Sustainable Future, UNESCO, UNU). The
first was to team up with all other organizations representing education and science. For this reason in Johannesburg the Ubuntu Alliance was formed, and the
Ubuntu Declaration adopted. The second decision was to change the focus fromenvironmental education, sustainability or sustainable development education, to“(all) education for sustainable development”. The idea was to focus on mainstreaming sustainable development in education so that it would get due attention in
the framework of all relevant subjects. So, the math teacher could address global
warming while explaining the role, value and functioning of mathematical models, the chemistry teacher could focus on emissions and air pollution and theeconomics teacher could pay attention to green budgeting. In this way education
for sustainable development became the other side of the same coin of “(quality)
education for all”. A breakthrough, indeed!
We are once again on the threshold of a challenging new phase; soon the DESD RCEs and thewill be concluded and we are discussing the Global Action Programme for 2015 Global Learningand beyond. Next year the MDG phase too will end. Since Rio+20 we have been Space
discussing what will be next, and we are preparing the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs). This name already indicates a sea change compared to the situationin 2000. At the beginning of this century and millennium it was difficult to findgeneral approval to include “sustaining the future” in the MDGs. Now, it is clearthat sustainable development is at the core of the future SDGs and this is clearlyreflected in the Outcome Document of the Open Working Group on Sustainable
Development Goals. It seems likely that the envisaged SDGs will give ample space forthe further development of programs and activities with regard to education for sustainable development, as proposed by UNESCO in its Global Action Programme.
This will enable us to continue and re-invigorate the activities we started in the
Decade, and to look to the possibilities to start new activities as appropriate.

269

270

For the time being, however, we can still refer ourselves and our activities to
UNESCO’s Framework and Implementation Scheme for the DESD. These were prepared with major institutions and organizations active in the field of ESD and they
still provide ample opportunities for innovative and effective activities. In the postDESD phase the overarching goal of ESD will continue to be to:… integrate the values inherent in sustainable development into all aspects of learning to encourage changes in behaviour that allow for a more sustainable and justsociety for all….DESD is aiming to promote a world where everyone has the opportunity to benefit from education and learn the values, behaviour and lifestyles
required for a sustainable future and for positive societal transformation (UNESCO,2006).
To achieve this, education should, among others, be: (1) locally relevant, addressing
local as well as global issues; (2) applicable, offering learning experiences integrated in day-to-day personal and professional life; (3) strengthen the capacity forcritical thinking and problem solving, as well as for participatory decisionmaking;and (4) interdisciplinary, holistic, values-driven and multi-method.
It is good to realize that environment, development, and society, and therefore sustainable development, are different from place to place, for each formal (historical)
region such as Catalunya or the Pantanal, and for each functional region such as
the Ruhr area or the Pearl River Delta. It is crucial to start at this scale, as these regional entities are characterized by their common characteristics, challenges andopportunities. Only there will it be possible to offer learning experiences that are
locally relevant and contextual, and offer opportunities for participatory decisionmaking. This was the reason why the Ubuntu Alliance (2002) decided to focus its
activities, as indicated by the last paragraph of its Declaration:
To achieve these challenges and objectives, we are resolved to work towards a new global learning space on education and sustainability that promotes cooperation andexchange between institutions at all levels and in all sectors of education around theworld. The space must be developed on the basis of international networks of institutions and the creation of regional centres of expertise, which bring together universities,
polytechnics, and institutions of secondary education and primary schools. We invite
all other responsible stakeholders to join us in this endeavour.
Of course, the participants could only speak for themselves, but the last line clearly
indicates that they envisaged their RCEs to really become multistakeholder networks of learning, uniquely positioned, for instance, to experiment with newpractices and ideas with regard to sustainable development issues and mainstream them into existing systems and curricula, and to open up spaces for the nonengaged to participate and contribute. Multistakeholder networks of learning arewhat the 129 RCEs really are. Of course the RCEs and the Global Learning Space
that will be created by their cooperation in regional and thematic or issue-based
ways, do provide the best opportunity to bring the ideals of ESD as formulated
in UNESCO’s Framework and Implementation Scheme to fruition. Thanks to theirmultistakeholder character, RCEs are also well equipped to play pragmatic, supportive roles in promoting and strengthening sustainable development in theirrespective regions.

Part IIIIn 2002 the initiators of the Ubuntu Alliance and the RCE program expected theirinitiative to be one of the most innovative and promising to generate worldwide
activity and support for ESD. They estimated that by the end of the Decade there
could be at least 100 RCEs, distributed over all continents. The potential of these
RCEs to mobilize institutions and people for ESD cannot easily be over-estimated.
At present there are 129 officially acknowledged, functioning RCEs. Just imagine
that each of these has on average seven active institutions and each institution has
seven active people (though a gross under-estimation). It means that this program
has mobilized more than 6,000 people at least (129 RCEs x 7 active institutions x
7 active people). As they are all directly involved in education, just imagine what
this means in terms of involved learners! When each of the participating institutions takes on the responsibility for just one project, there will be more than 900
projects ongoing (129 RCEs x 7 active institutions x 1 active project). Such is themobilizing potential of the RCE system. The Global Learning Space, too, is stepwise
becoming a reality, with already a great number of functioning regional, thematicand issue-based networks of RCEs. “Think global, act local” will be made possible
thanks to the development of the RCEs. However, the opposite, “think local, act
global” is equally true. The real challenge in trying to achieve a better world and amore sustainable future lies in the need to link our actions at the different levels – fromlocal to global and the other way around. The twin concepts, RCEs and the Global
Learning Space (GLS), offer the opportunity to continuously work on the appropriate and efficient linking between our ambitions and actions on the different
levels of geographical scale.
Looking forward to 2015 and beyond some thoughts, however, should be developed A Look Ahead
about the future of the RCE/GLS system. The Ubuntu Committee of Peers might
promote some activities, here, together with the Global RCE Service Centre:
1. Much attention should continuously be given to the further growth of thenumber and programs of the RCEs.
2. The efforts to create the Global Learning Space for ESD should be enhanced
and given a higher priority. Taking into account the developments during the
Decade, it seems that networking of RCEs at different geographical scales
takes place almost naturally. This is so partly because of the impact of geographical proximity and partly because RCEs that are not too far away alsofunction under more comparable circumstances and cope with more recognizable issues. Learning from each other, in particular from RCEs working
under quite different conditions and confronted with quite different sustainable
development situations and issues, however, is crucial for a better global understanding. Therefore, it is important for the post-DESD era to systematicallydevelop more and stronger thematic and issue-based international RCE networks. Some themes and issues are already selected but others need to be strategically chosen and, where possible, linked to themes and issues that have alreadybeen prioritized by UNESCO and other agencies or international processes.
3. It will be important to continue monitoring, while improving assessment
practices, the functioning and activities of the already acknowledged RCEs andnetworks of RCEs, without infringing upon the freedom of individual RCEs

271

272

to develop in an optimal way within their specific conditions and taking into
account the specific expertise and capabilities of the institutions and people
directly involved. One way to do this is to have regular reporting on the numberof projects the RCEs are working on, which is already happening. The Global
RCE Service Centre and the Committee of Peers may then analyze these projects in relation to the themes and priorities of the UNESCO ESD program.
In this way it would be possible to organize targeted contributions to that
program. Also, it would become possible to identify critical topics, such as theeradication of poverty and hunger to achieve sustainable development, which
form the work of the RCEs but are not present in UNESCO’s programs.
4. Much more specific attention should be given to the activities of RCEs in relation to the sustainable development of the region of which they are part andthus serve. RCEs as multistakeholder networks of learning should learn fromothers in the region, but they should also participate and contribute to the region, and to the institutions and people that form the region. The Global RCE
Service Centre and the Peer Group should further heighten the prestige of theawards given for such activities at the annual Global Conference. They could
develop additional strategies to increase the number of valuable projects andpotential candidates for this award. Jacques Delors pointed out in his report,
Learning: The Treasure from Within, that the highest forms of learning are “tolearn to do” and “to learn to live together”. The extent to which the RCEs are
successful in these two aspects will be decisive for their success.

References
Ubuntu Alliance. (2002). Ubuntu Declaration on
education and science and technology for sustainable
development. Retrieved August 29, 2014 from http://
www.scj.go.jp/en/sca/activities/conferences/ubuntu.htm
Magna Charta Universitatum. (1988). Retrieved August 29, 2014 from http://www.magna-charta.org/
library/userfiles/file/mc_english.pdf

UNESCO. (2006). Framework of the UN DESD International Implementation Scheme. Executive summary.
Retrieved August 27, 2014 from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0014/001486/148650e.pdf

Part III

273

274

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

Part III

Chapter 11

Looking Ahead

1

Zinaida Fadeeva and Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana

Learning towards Sustainability Change:
Role of multistakeholder initiatives
The question this book explores relates to the role of multistakeholder,cross-sectoral, regional initiatives such as RCEs in pursuing sustainability
through learning and innovation. What could RCEs do when a significant
number of people move from subsistence production systems to more centralized and globalized forms of lifestyles in relation to food, energy, health careor housing? What could these constellations of partners do in conditions ofrapidly accelerated changes underlying financial, economic and ecosystemcrises and an array of challenges that transcend generations, are futuristic andnot fully predictable in nature? Most importantly, what would be the potentialof networks of sustainability learning and practice in a situation where global
governance systems for sustainable development are still evolving? What would
be their role when challenges related to sustainable production and consumption, biodiversity and ecosystems, cultural diversity, health, human rights,
peace and security, urbanization, poverty, inequality and increasing geographical, locational or technological disparities are at a stage where significant
progress in terms of conceptualization, commitment and actions is required?

This section draws, in part, on the earlier ideas shared in Fadeeva & Payyappallimana (2013). Moving Forward: Upscaling and mainstreaming learning towards more sustainable systems of production and consumption and enhancing livelihood and Payyappallimana & Fadeeva(2013). Moving Forward: Mainstreaming and upscaling traditional knowledge and biodiversity practices, both published as part of Learning
Contributions of the Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development by UNU-IAS.

1

275

276

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

These questions are especially critical now, when the global community is taking
stock of the major sustainability processes related to Agenda 21 and the MDGs,
and the focus is on the new journey towards the SDGs, an intergovernmental
process launched at Rio+20.
The authors suggest that aspirations towards a more sustainable society basedon principles of equity, well-being, ecosystems sustainability, resource efficiency, economic sufficiency, inclusive development and societal resilience cannot becompletely realized solely through the aid of international frameworks or instruments. The critical component of developing more sustainable systems requires
a focus on local action and learning that becomes a testing stone of national andinternational visions at the community level. Such initiatives become innovation and sustainable development nodes locally, and are also expected to be policy
advocates and architects of the new regional, national and international sustainability regimes. Experiences of communities such as RCEs, in addition to demonstrating abilities to address the need for development locally, show opportunities
for growth that would eventually become the elements of the distributed sustainability governance system.

Global Player inFurthering
Sustainability

The multiplicity of contextualized development strategies through educational
interventions makes the RCE network a unique place for showcasing how local
multistakeholders valuing sustainability can synergize actions under a common
umbrella for collective action. They also portray the relevance of a global space forconcerted action and understanding of the significance of local actions, be it in thearea of sustainability or education for sustainability.

Box 11.1
SDG Goal 4: Ensure inclusive andequitable quality education andpromote life-long learning
opportunities for all

4.7 By 2030 ensure all learners acquire
knowledge and skills needed to promotesustainable development, including among
others through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, humanrights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity
and of culture’s contribution to sustainable
development(Source: Introduction to the proposal of theopen working group for sustainable development goals, http://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/focussdgs.html)

At the time of writing this chapter, the Open Working
Group drafting the SDGs shared with the world goals
and targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda(UN, 2014). The document, which puts people at thecentre of development, states as one of its overarching
objectives, “Poverty eradication, changing unsustainable and promoting sustainable patterns of consumption and production and protecting and managing thenatural resource base of economic and social development”. Importantly, it recognizes the need for the vision and approaches that are “in accordance with its
national circumstances and priorities” (paragraph 13);
but the success of implementation will be supported
by a global partnership for sustainable development(paragraph 14). This together with Goal 4, “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote
life-long learning opportunities for all”, make the RCE
networks especially interesting for the sustainable development community.
Even with the SDGs being still at the stage of formulation and evolution, RCEs remain a powerful means of
implementation of the sustainability agenda as inter-

Part IIIpreted by the regions. This is because the functionsof the RCE network align perfectly with SDG Goal 17(as per the proposal retrieved in early September; seeBox 11.2), “Strengthen the means of implementation
and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable
development” (UN, 2014).

Box 11.2
SDG Goal 17: Strengthen the means of
implementation and revitalize the global
partnership for sustainable development

With learning and innovation at the heart of their activities, RCEs are not just able to respond to the problems of the region but are also able to develop and test
ideas for the future of their regions while providing
national and international processes with feedback onoffered sustainability strategies.

17.16 Enhance the global partnership forsustainable development complemented bymulti-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize
and share knowledge, expertise, technologies and financial resources to support theachievement of sustainable development
goals in all countries, particularly developing
countries

Developing a Foundation for Sustainable
Development through Learning

Multi-stakeholder partnerships

17.17 Encourage and promote effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships

Over the last decade the RCEs have shown innovative results in areas where they face many barriers dueto the complexity of issues that they address. The regional backdrop of an RCE’s work often comprises(Source: Introduction to the proposal of thethe still dominant fragmentation of the development
open working group for sustainable developagenda with limited alliance among priorities andment goals, http://sustainabledevelopment.
neglect of some issues, compartmentalized knowledun.org/focussdgs.html)
ge expertise, lack of coordination among the key stakeholders of development, divergence in strategic
goals, non-alignment of operational practices, and varied geopolitical interests.
Rectifying these realities is challenging as they are in the succession of practices
that give legitimacy to only a few forms of knowledge and limit the definition ofdevelopment to the notion of economic growth. Post-Johannesburg, sustainable
development discourse called for radically different approaches that encouragelearning and knowledge development by various stakeholders, including non-experts and lay experts. Though well recognized, these are still challenging undertakings.
Developing capacities of collective, problem-based and systemic approaches to learningand action is central to RCE work. On a practical note RCE projects demonstrate theinterlinkages among the topics of sustainable development, e.g. biodiversity, climate, health, and local livelihood practices. RCEs emphasize the impact of various
personal behaviours, policies, guiding concepts, and development approaches onsustainability aspects, as well as the complexity associated with a comprehensive
approach to sustainability challenges.
Successes in developing the capacity of regions to address sustainability challenges were deemed possible because of the critical characteristics of the RCEs thatenable them to look beyond conventional arrangements that foster fragmentationof the development agenda and isolate actions of regional stakeholders. The requirements of a long-term commitment to the agreed agenda aligned to regional
priorities, strategies of developing sustainability competences through locally re-

277

278

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

levant actions and learning, and attention to value systems, lead to transformationof the regions from within, as demonstrated by previous chapters (see, for example, Chapters 2-4).
By engaging the knowledge and innovative potential of the regions, and by minimizing and distributing risks, RCEs create new, strategically-oriented opportunities for development. At the level of the communities, RCE initiatives provide
a business case for the key themes of sustainability learning: working with innovative practices for a green economy; development of high quality TVET andengagement with the youth workforce; identifying critical nodes for livelihood
improvement opportunities; appropriate technologies and local innovations; creating locally relevant consumer education processes; and pursuing opportunities
for sustainable entrepreneurship, among others.
With their experience of addressing sustainability issues in various settings – rural,
urban, mixed, developed and developing – and through participatory problemoriented learning, the RCEs could provide models of co-engaged, cooperative
learning in settings where alienation of the stakeholders from the issue is perpetuated by lack of knowledge and/or resources, or lack of direct experience withthe problem. In the process of engagement with multistakeholder and multidisciplinary approaches, RCEs create specific regional capabilities to connect not
only to local and regional learning networks but, through vertical linkages, withnational and international processes as well. The experience of RCEs engaged
in local projects while partnering with RCEs in other regions creates a platform
for developing knowledge about different local-global systems leading to moresustainable societies. Such knowledge is being recorded, among other processes,
in the course of the RCE assessment process that is conceptualized and piloted
across RCE communities (Chapter 7). Connections are developed among RCEs
in the course of joint projects, collective reflections and writing, and while strategizing for a greater common impact within and across different continents. These
connections provide a critical global dimension necessary for addressing the challenges of SCP and sustainable livelihood in the future, by providing a deeper understanding of ongoing practices, systematic conceptualization of possible pathsof development, fostering local and global policies conducive for developing sustainable societies, and forging deeper synergies among processes and programs
that are focused on the issues. Of critical importance is the fact that by centringon sustainability challenges from the perspectives of developing and developed regions, the RCE community provides a unique opportunity to bring into focus thequestion of global justice in terms of understanding the complex responsibility ofcreating and mitigating problems of development.
RCEs present promising opportunities in their ambition to balance sustainable
development priorities in communities and globally from different perspectives– global-local economic development, cultural issues, and questions of the supply
chain. In the adoption of any perspective, relations that have already been established among the RCEs constitute a possibility of developing learning and research consortia that are required to address sustainability issues across regions.
For example, a preference towards more sustainable practices that are based on
the knowledge and appreciation of diversity in interpretation of the sustainability challenges along the supply chain would require significant systemic innova-

Part III

tions across countries and production sectors. Such more sustainable consumption-production systems seek new forms of incentives that secure a fair and justdistribution of benefits for resource use among local and global stakeholders. A
new culture of using and consuming in the professional or personal domain isnecessary to create preferences that lead to sustenance and revitalization of ecosystems. Such, often radical, changes in priorities are a challenging task as implications for different choices have to be understood and negotiated for different
groups, including the marginalized and the disadvantaged.

Many of the examples presented in this book are still in the early stages of theirimplementation. However, up-scaling successful models needs immediate attention. Up-scaling here does not mean a simplistic replication of practices. Moreover, due to the contextual nature of such experiences they may not be amenable
to abstraction, though the process learning elements can be promoted far andwide. A comprehensive strategy is needed to understand these models of local andregional networking and collective learning, to support them and enable them tomake a deeper impact through engagement in relevant partnerships and policy
processes.
In the final section of this chapter, and as a complementary view to the future
vision of the RCE community expressed by the authors representing the RCEcommunity (Chapter 9), some initial ideas on the position of the RCEs as a global
force for sustainable development and thoughts on leveraging RCE actions andtheir impact are offered.
Developing Local Capabilities for Sustainability and Learning in Partnerships
Today, the RCE consortium and its stakeholders take stock of its 10-year history
and plan for the future with visionary aspirations and strategies (Chapter 10).
Based on its long engagement with the RCEs through development of concepts,
strategies, support of actions and research, the ESD team of UNU-IAS highlights
a number of priorities that help strengthen the RCE community and facilitate its
input in a cohesive and effective sustainability process.
One of the challenges of initiating projects that are significant in scope, scale andinnovative potential is the enhanced capacity of the regional networks to initiate
ongoing learning in critical sustainability areas. Developing capacities, through specifically designed and implemented change projects of the RCEs in action research andtransformative learning would help unlock the potential of the regions to address
various challenges of development. Importantly, more ambitious coordinating
functions need to be developed in order to facilitate reflection, application and evaluation of RCE learning experiences to enable meaningful development of long-termsustainability practices. Unlocking local capabilities for learning and innovation
would not only unleash national processes, but would also address the often pinpointed social, environmental and economic conflicts that occur across the regions.

Developing and
Unlocking the
Potential of the
RCE Community

279

280

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

Development and Strengthening of Collaborative Adoptive Governance: 
Towards greater resilience of the regions
The RCE community is a unique partner in developing and testing sustainability
governance where learning is important in order to shed the dominance of certain
universal discourses and enable a multiplicity of models and voices. For example, through meaningful engagement with traditional communities, RCEs could
offer a promising setting for preserving and growing the diversity of contemporarily-relevant traditional, generational and largely oral knowledge that, in many
communities, is now limited to a few traditional knowledge holders and is at riskof disappearing. Through growing trust and community links at the levels of values, knowledge and practices, such learning could be strengthened through appropriate participatory learning and assessment methodologies, especially among
youth through an intergenerational educational process both in formal as well as
informal learning settings.
Strengthening collaborative adoptive distributed governance and coordinationis also to be encouraged in the RCE networks in order to ensure continuity in
RCE activities, especially in regions undergoing rapid changes. Coping with suchchanges and shaping them, which is critical, requires governance built on principles of collaboration, networking, learning, and innovation in response to theunfolding circumstances, dilemmas and surprises.
Purposefully increased attention to the adoptive collaborative governance would
increase the potential of the RCEs to contribute to the resilience of the regions.
This would, however, require more focused learning about systems of decisionmaking and the effect of nuances such as the selection of direction of actions whenseveral directions are available, timing of making and implementing decisions,and synergies among projects on the overall results. This book demonstrates that
RCEs possess all the values (attention to diversity, including biodiversity, equality,
development from within, etc.), capabilities and understanding of research andlearning (including appreciation of diversity of perspectives and frameworks thatgovern research), and established practices providing feedback to the stakeholders(including timing and frameworks of the assessment) that would make them capable of bringing together sustainability and resilience thinking.
Sustaining Continuity of RCE Actions
Many RCEs are initially led by strong facilitating organizations (and individuals
within these organizations), have a purposeful and persistent distribution of responsibilities and are accompanied by capacity-building in partnerships development and coordination. This minimizes problems of agency, facilitates stronger
collective knowledge development and actions and, generally, increases the vitalityof RCE networks. One of the main strategic directions will now be to find newchampions, connect them to regional and global processes, and engage them withproject formulation and policy work.
At the global level, there is also a need to strengthen the process for identifying
and supporting RCEs that struggle to sustain their existence. De-listing them forunderperformance too soon would not be advisable as enormous effort and collective learning are necessary in the early stages for establishing a fully functioning
RCE. Careful identification of the challenges of continuous collaborative work as

Part III

Participants at the 7th Global RCE Conference in Tongyeong, Republic of Korea

well as of supportive strategies, delivered from inside the region by the RCE community and the Global RCE Service Centre, would need to be carefully elaborated
and further tested.
Consolidating Inter-RCE Actions
The RCE community looks to develop in its capability not only to address sustainability challenges but also to grow in number and outreach. A more strategic
approach to coordination of actions among existing RCEs and to attracting theattention of territories with pressing sustainability issues, might assist in consolidation of the local, subnational partners in addressing sustainability challenges.
These responses are seen as complementary to the already unfolding coordination among the RCEs on a continental basis and within thematic clusters. For example, India has 11 RCEs that are not only effective in finding local sustainability
solutions but also in exploring coordination mechanisms among themselves andwith other relevant networks. Other rapidly transitioning countries such as China,
Russia, South Africa and Brazil have a much smaller presence of RCEs, an aspectthat needs focused attention. Strikingly, in most countries RCEs are located in
rapidly growing cities, which have a multitude of challenges of unsustainability.
Such RCEs, especially those that are strongly networked with local governments
and other public sector organizations, could play a critical role in advancing learning and sharing both within their own network as well as with potential entrants
to the network. For example, whereas there are more than a few city networks
aligning for advancing sustainable development in urbanization, an exclusive
consortium focused on education and sustainable development can be envisaged
through the RCE partners. Apart from addressing changes at the community
level, the consortium could play a central role in redesigning development andeducational policies.

281

282

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

Box 11.3
GAP Priority Action Areas
Local communities
Implementation:
12. Accelerate the search for sustainable
development solutions at the local level
through ESD. Effective and innovative solutions to sustainable development challenges
are frequently developed at the local level.
Multi-stakeholder dialogue and cooperation
play a key role in this, for example, between
local governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, media, education and research institutions, and individual
citizens. ESD supports multi-stakeholder learning and community engagement, and links
the local to the global. The full mobilizationof education and learning for sustainable development calls for enhanced action at the
local level. This requires in particular the following:(a) Local networks that facilitate multi-stakeholder learning for sustainable development
are developed, operationalized and enhanced. This includes the diversification and expansion of existing networks, so that new andmore stakeholders are integrated, including
indigenous communities.

Creating Synergies with Global Networks, Processes
and Policies
Fulfilling the local, national and international objectives of ESD and the aspirations of developing sustainable practices requires thoughtful engagement oflocal, national and global processes. The considerationof justice and long-term consequences of unsustainable practices do require assessment of local action
contributions to more environmentally balanced anddignified life and the effect of global policies on local
quality of life. Such an ambitious task calls for the engagement of the RCE community with the practices ofinternational networks and organizations that facilitate development of sustainability policy and practices
in various areas of sustainable development. For example, in relation to more sustainable consumption
and production and livelihood practices, a strong
potential for collaboration might exist with National
Cleaner Production Centres (NCPCs) facilitated by
UNIDO and UNEP, Global Centres of UNDP, UNDP
Equator Initiative network, network of ASEAN Centres, university networks such as MESA operating in
Africa, ProSPER.Net in Asia-Pacific, or Copernicus
Alliance in Europe.

Creation of synergies with like-minded initiatives
would need to be complemented with policy engagement relevant to sustainable production andconsumption and sustainable livelihoods. Establishedat Rio+20, the 10-Year Framework of Programmes
on SCP – a global framework for cooperation to acce(b) Local authorities and governments enlerate transition towards SCP and resource-efficient
hance their role in providing learning opporsystems in developed and developing countries – istunities for sustainable development. Thisan example of the global policy processes that give
includes, as appropriate, supporting, at thean opportunity to align the actions of many partners.
local level, the integration of ESD in formal
Critically, advancing the ESD agenda would require
education, as well as the provision of, andstronger engagement with the post-DESD agenda,
support to, non-formal and informal learning
alongside the UNESCO Global Action Programme
opportunities in sustainable development forand beyond. Cross-sectoral learning engagements ofall members of the community.
the RCEs within and across the regions provide an opportunity for the RCEs to contribute to all five priority
Source: UNESCO, 2013. areas of GAP (Chapter 8), with a key focus being to
upscale learning at local communities as outlined in
GAP (see Box 11.2). Moreover, it lends a chance to engage with these areas simultaneously (Chapter 9) linking them to other sustainability and learning processes.
To achieve the full potential of such partnerships in realizing broad goals of mobilizing and building expertise in delivering SCP and livelihood actions, there isa need to conduct a broad assessment of the expertise available in the respective
networks, including the entire RCE community, and of the expertise required inPart IIIvarious countries. Such mapping would identify opportunities for South-South,
North-South and triangular collaborations among RCE partners and partners ofother networks. With collaborative projects in place, it would be important forcollaborating networks and partners to develop channels to continuously respondto the existing gaps in expertise by identifying, developing and disseminating analytical tools, policies and best practices to support sustainability institutions andprojects, while continuing to learn from these activities.
Engagement with the communities outside their own RCEs and developing collaborative clusters of learn-ing and action with other networks, organizations andprocesses pursuing goals of sustainability has to become a key strategic directionof the RCE community in developing clusters of actions. Experience developed
by individual RCEs, their groups or the entire community, especially in the areaof learning for change, becomes a valuable contribution to many communities ofpractice. Yet, such engagement would require careful facilitation and ground workthat analyzes potential synergies in goals and actions.
Strengthening the capacity of RCEs to contribute to SD through broader regional and cluster engagements would need to be advanced through several means.
These would include developing platforms for exchanging information, knowledge and practices; developing training modules for and with various groups;
developing curricula for formal education, notably higher education institutions;and facilitating research for supporting knowledge and practices in the criticalareas of development.

The DESD has facilitated a strategy – preliminary, yet profound – towards local- Conclusion
global networking in ESD. To empower these initiatives and get them moving
beyond pilot models, serious efforts focused on knowledge coordination andnew financing mechanisms are required, along with learning for innovative selfgovernance systems already in place.
Processes of innovation and collective-learning towards regional sustainability solutions would have to unfold synergistically with national and global policies andframeworks. RCEs have proven to be a dynamic consortium that can facilitate
development of the required system.
Serving for many years as a resource and facilitating partner for the RCE community, UNU-IAS will continue facilitation of capacity-building, research and policy
engagement functions among RCEs. These could be done also to facilitate advancement of the sustainability agenda in line with global processes such as theConvention on Biological Diversity, the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC), the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the 10-Year Framework Programmes on SCP (10YFP),FAO Youth engagement, etc. While many of these actions are still to be put inplace in close consultation with RCE stakeholders, the direction of actions will be
guided by the strategic directions discussed earlier and will aim at developmentof RCE governance systems, supporting continuity of RCE actions, consolidating
collaborative alliances among RCEs, and between RCEs and other networks and

283

284

Chapter 11 Looking Ahead

processes, while growing the number of RCEs especially in under-represented
regions. This would require a systematic assessment of the needs of the regions
and identification on where RCEs could make the largest impact. It would also
require mobilization of the RCEs and their stakeholders in facilitating new RCE
networks in these regions.
Sustaining the continuity of RCE actions would demand, in addition to a stronger
emphasis on capacity development of the current champions, identification andempowerment of new leaders and undertaking action research to provide the
network partners with evidence of RCE contributions to regional development.
UNU-IAS believes that facilitating thematic and strategic clustering of joint inter-RCE programs as well as regional networks will require enhancement of thecapacity of RCEs to engage, and of strengthening communication channels at
local and international levels. It will take additional efforts to increase motivationand visibility by highlighting best practices through publications, recognition
awards and so on.
Development and strengthening collaborative adoptive governance will requirecontinuation of UNU-IAS networking with other UN and multilateral, regional and national agencies and networks, including through the UN interagency
committees working with questions of ESD and sustainability. Such engagement
could bring learning from other UN agencies and international processes toenhance the quality of RCE work.
Driven by the ambition of creating a functioning Global Learning Space for SD,
which is still in its early stages, while promoting diverse and contextual development models on the ground, UNU-IAS will move forward resolutely post-2014 toengage with GAP as well as SDG commitments.

References
United Nations. (2014). Introduction to the proposalof the open working group for Sustainable Development
Goals. Retrieved July 10, 2014, from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/focussdgs.html

UNESCO. (2013). Proposal for a Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development asfollow-up to the United Nations Decade of Education for
Sustainable Development (DESD) after 2014. RetrievedApril 2, 2014, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/ 0022/002243/224368e.pdf

Part III

285

286

Biographies

Abel Atiti is a Research Fellow at UNU-IAS. He holds a PhD in Environmental
Studies from Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. He is involved in the expansion and strengthening of the global network of RCEs, with a focus on Africa.
Contact: atiti@unu.edu

Kiran Banga Chhokar is an independent ESD professional. She is currently a Visiting Professor at the School of Planning and Architecture in New Delhi. She was
the founding editor of the Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, andProgram Director of Higher Education at the Centre for Environment Education.
She is also the Focal Point for the Indian RCEs.
Contact: kiranbc@gmail.com

Zinaida Fadeeva is a Senior Specialist, Strategy and Policy at UNU-IAS.Since
2003 she worked with formulation of the RCE concept and then with many aspects of RCE community development. She works with international sustainability processes related to education and capacity development. Among her interests
are questions of ESD, change, public–private partnerships and higher education.
Contact: fadeeva@unu.edu

Laima Galkute is currently working as an Associate Professor at Vilnius University in Lithuania and has been a coordinator of RCE Lithuania since 2013. She
is an expert in the implementation of the UNECE Strategy for ESD. Her maininterests focus on developing creativity and quality assurance in higher education.
Contact: laima.galkute@gmail.com

Olga María Bermúdez Guerrero is the Director of RCE Bogotá. She is a sociologist, Professor and Project Evaluation Specialist at the National Universityof Colombia. She is also Professor at the Institute for Environmental Studies,
IDEA-UN, where she was Director of the Master’s program until 2005. In 2010
she was awarded the title of Master Teacher by the Secretaries of Education andEnvironment of Bogotá.
Contact: olgaber@gmail.com

Stephanie Jill Hodge has been an International Technical Advisor / Development Program Specialist in the UN system since 1990. Prior to her UN work,
she spent four years in Africa working as a volunteer teacher for World University
Services of Canada. Her academic interest as well as her work have been on thesynergies and interlinkages between human rights and children’s rights to education – including those of children with disabilities – climate change, education
outcomes, environment and development, democratic governance, conflict prevention and disaster risk reduction.
Contact: shodge1@gmail.com

287Charles Hopkins is at York University in Toronto where he holds both a UNESCO
Chair and a UNU Chair. He is an advisor to UNESCO and UNU regarding the
UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. He played roles in both
the Rio and Johannesburg UN Summits on Sustainability. He was an author ofChapter 36 of Agenda 21, the Rio Earth Summit Action Plan on Education, Public
Awareness and Training. Previously, Mr. Hopkins was a Superintendent with theToronto Board of Education.

Detlev Lindau-Bank is an education researcher, certified social pedagogue andis docent and Research Fellow at University of Vechta. He is also a co-directorof a coaching consulting agency. He has been working in ESD since 1998, having organized the first international conference on ESD at his university in
2005. There the UNESCO-subnetwork and Europe-wide network for re-orienting
teacher education towards ESD, Baltic Sea and Black Sea Circle Consortium, wasfounded. As chairman of RCE Oldenburger Münsterland he is responsible foryouth matters and international networking. In 2009 he was appointed coordinator of European RCEs by UNU. He is a member of the round table of the German
National UNESCO-Committee for the Decade since 2011.

Betsan Martin is Co-Director of RCE Waikato, a multidisciplinary centre developed in partnership with Mãori. Academic studies in philosophy of educationand membership in the International Forum on Ethics and Responsibility informher work on education and integrated governance for sustainability. RCE projects
include jurisprudence of responsibility for water governance.
Contact: betsan@response.org.nz

Yoko Mochizuki is a Programme Specialist for the ESD section of the UNESCO
Secretariat in Paris, France. Prior to joining UNESCO in 2011, she was an ESD
Specialist for the ESD Programme at UNU-IAS. She has been fully engaged in theimplementation of the UN Decade of ESD since its beginning in 2005.
Contact: y.mochizuki@unesco.org

Ndumiso Nongwe is the Environmental Manager for Makana Municipality andis convenor of RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape. He has been supporting thedevelopment of youth structures engaged in environmental work, particularly in
relation to waste management and community gardening.
Contact: n.nongwe@gmail.com

Rob O’Donoghue is a Professor in the Environmental Learning Research Centre at Rhodes University. He has worked with African RCEs on evaluation andon small-scale social innovations in RCE Makana and Rural Eastern Cape. He
approaches social learning as an evaluative process of co-engaged change so thatthe framing of evaluation practices becomes a natural extension of what people
are already able to do well.
Contact: r.odonoghue@ru.ac.za

288

Biographies

Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana is a Research Coordinator in the ESD Programme at UNU-IAS. His work has primarily focused on the research and applicationof traditional medicine to meet primary health care in local communities and scoping their relevance in public health policy. His main research interests include
traditional medicine in public health, medical pluralism, traditional knowledge
epistemology and sustainable development.
Contact: payyappalli@unu.edu

Roger A. Petry is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Luther College at the
University of Regina, teaching in the areas of ethics, philosophy of religion, critical thinking and sustainable development. His research interests include strategic
university innovation for sustainability. He is a Rhodes Scholar and co-coordinatorof RCE Saskatchewan.
Contact: roger.petry@uregina.ca

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak is the President of the International Association of Universities, a UNESCO-affiliated organization based in Paris. He has served as theVice-Chancellor of Universiti Sains Malaysia from 2000 to 2011. He was the founding convenor of RCE Penang, Malaysia, one of the seven initial RCEs. Currently
he is an Honorary Professor at University of Nottingham and also the Chair ofIslamic Leadership at the Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia.
Contact: dzulrazak@gmail.com

Kim Smith is an environmental sociologist at Portland Community College andthe Coordinator of RCE Greater Portland. She served as the AASHE representative to Rio+20, is a Fellow with the US Partnership for ESD, works with community non-profits, and has led programs supporting service-learning, faculty development, and sustainability curriculum.

Mario Tabucanon is a Visiting Professor at the ESD Programme of UNU-IAS.
He is also Emeritus Professor at the Asian Institute of Technology in Thailand,
where he held the posts of Provost and President before joining UNU-IAS.
Contact: mario.tabucanon@gmail.com

Hans van Ginkel was the Rector Magnificus of Utrecht University from 1986 to
1997 and Rector of UNU from 1997 to 2007. He is currently an Honorary Professor at Utrecht University. He was a member of UNESCO’s expert group that organized the World Conference on Higher Education in 1998, being responsible, inparticular, for the thematic debate on “Higher Education and Sustainable Human
Development”. He was at the head of many initiatives in the field of ESD: he wasan initiator of the Copernicus Program and Charter in 1988; at the World Summit
on Sustainable Development in 2002 he campaigned for the Decade on ESD; andsetting up the Ubuntu Alliance and the mobilization program of the RCEs. Hans
van Ginkel has received five honorary doctorates.
Contact: j.a.vanginkel@uu.nl

List of Abbreviations

List of Abbreviations

ABS
AAEAP

Access and Benefit Sharing
ASEAN Environmental Education
Action Plans
ASEAN
Association of Southeast Asian
Nations
CBD
Convention on Biological Diversity
CEE
Centre for Environment Education
COP
Conference of PartiesCSD
UN Commission on Sustainable
Development
CSP
Community Sustainability
Partnership
CSR
Corporate Social Responsibility
DESD
United Nations Decade of Educationfor Sustainable Development
EA
Ecosystem Approach
EFA
Education for All
ESD
Education for Sustainable
Development
GAP
Global Action Programme
GLS
Global Learning SpaceHEIHigher Education Institution
IAU
International Association of
Universities
ICA
International Cooperative Alliance
ILO
International Labour Organization
IUCN
International Union for Conservationof Nature
MDGs
Millennium Development Goals
NGO
Non-governmental Organization
OECD
Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development
OPEDUCA
Open Educational Areas
PISA
Program for International Student
Achievement
ProSPER.Net Promotion of Sustainability in
Postgraduate Education andResearch Network
RCE
Regional Centre of Expertiseon Education for Sustainable
Development
SADC
South African Development
Community

SCP
SD
SDGs
SADC REEP

SME
TERI
TICAD
TK
TVET
UN
UNECE
UNEP
UNESCOUNU
UNU-IAS

UWS
WCED
WHO
WSSD
YUVA

Sustainable Consumption and
Production
Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development Goals
Southern African Development
Community’s Regional Environmental Education Programme
Small and Medium Enterprises
The Energy and Resources InstituteTokyo International Conference on
African Development
Traditional Knowledge
Technical and Vocational Education
and Training
United Nations
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
United Nations Environment
Programme
United Nations Education, Scientificand Cultural Organization
United Nations University
United Nations University Institutefor the Advanced Study of Sustainability, formerly the United Nations
University Institute of Advanced
Studies
University of Western Sydney
World Commission on Environmentand Development
World Health Organization
Word Summit on Sustainable
Development
Youth Unite for Voluntary Action

289

Participants at the 8th Global RCE Conference in Nairobi, Kenya

Natal, South Africa / Lagos, Nigeria / Lesotho / Makan& Rural Eastern Cape, South Africa / Maputo, Mozam
bique / Mau Ecosystem Complex, Kenya / Minna, N
geria / Senegal / Swaziland / Zomba, Malawi / Bogotá
Colombia / British Columbia (North Cascades), Canad
Chaco, Argentina / Curitiba-Parana, Brazil / Grand Ra
pids, USA / Greater Sudbury, Canada / Guatemala / L
ma-Callao, Peru / Montreal, Canada / North Texas, USA
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / São Paulo, Brazil / Saskatchewan, Canada / Tantramar, Canada / Toronto, Canada
Western Jalisco, Mexico / Anji, China / Arunachal Pra
desh, India / Bangalore, India / Beijing, China / Bogorndonesia / Bohol, Philippines / Cebu, Philippines / Cham, Thailand / Chandigarh, India / Chubu, Japan / Delhndia / East Kalimantan, Indonesia / Gippsland, Aust
alia / Goa, India / Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh / Greaer Phnom Penh, Cambodia / Greater Sendai, Japan
Greater Western Sydney, Australia / Guwahati, India
Hyogo-Kobe, Japan / Ilocos, Philippines / Incheon, Re
public of Korea / Kitakyushu, Japan / Kodagu, India
Kyrgyzstan / Lucknow, India / Mumbai, India / Norther
Mindanao, Philippines / Okayama, Japan / Pacific Island
Countries / Penang, Malaysia / Pune, India / Shangri-la
China / Southern Vietnam / Srinagar, India / Tongyeong
Republic of Korea / Trang, Thailand / Ulju, Republic o
Korea / Western Australia / Yogyakarta, Indonesia / Yo
ohama, Japan / Açores, Portugal / Barcelona, Spain
Central Macedonia, Greece / Creias-Oeste, Portugal
Crete, Greece / Denmark / East Midlands, UK / Espoo