Photo credit: https://earthcharter.org/earth-charter-international-education-conference-2019/
Invited plenary session paper presented at the International Earth Charter Education Conference: Leading the Way to Sustainability 2030
San José, Costa Rica, 29 – 31 January 2019
Given the
wide-range of interests represented in this room on environment, political action, young
people’s engagement in areas related to the 17 Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), I aim to keep my discussions focused on the education
strand of the SDGs and discuss the broader role of education and the Earth
Charter in meeting these goals.
In doing this I would like to pose two key
issues. The first is “what is the conceptual framework of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and its relevance to particular subjects, themes, or
issues?” And the second is “how do these goals engage with the human/personal
dimension?” These questions might be one way to further develop some of the
important conversations for this week.
The rationale for my posing these questions is
to develop a values-based framework for Education for Sustainable Development
(ESD) and Global Citizenship Education (GCED or GCE). In this regards the Earth
Charter makes an important contribution as a model ethical framework (as Mirian
and others have called it). Also, my long-term study on selected Asian thinkers
offers suggestions for a more intercultural approach to ESD and GCE.
In addition, the Earth Charter, as in the case
for my chosen thinkers, are also initiators of movements of people who have
been enthused to act within their daily lives to create positive individual and
social transformation. And as I argue through this paper, a broader
engagement with the human/personal dimension is necessary for the success of
education for global citizenship which is part of the United Nation’s 2030
agenda and its 17 SDGs which “seek to eradicate extreme poverty and strengthen
universal peace by integrating and balancing the three dimensions of
sustainable development – economic, social and environmental” (UNESCO 2018: 3).
Revisiting the conceptual framework
To begin, let us briefly revisit some of the key discussions
taking place on the education strand of the SDGs, in particular, on education
for global citizenship.
Global Citizenship Education (GCED) is one of the strategic areas of UNESCO’s education sector program for the period 2014-2021. UNESCO’s work in this field is guided by the Education 2030 Agenda and Framework for Action, notably Target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 4 on education), which calls on countries to ensure that all learners are provided with the knowledge and skills to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, 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.
There are however several existing and ongoing studies that
suggest a wide range of emerging definitions of the term global citizenship. As
well as there are gaps that are shown to exist between Western – non-Western
perspectives (Wang and Hoffman 2016); religious – secular (Dill 2013); national
– political – cosmopolitan education for global citizenship.
For example, there is a wide-ranging
scholarship that challenges the Western dominated agendas and the underlying
Western worldview in global citizenship education (Andreotti 2006, 2011;
Andreotti and de Souza 2012; Bowden 2003; Calhoun 2002; Dill 2013; Gaudelli
2016; Jooste and Heleta 2017; Merryfield 2009; Tarozzi and Torres 2016; Torres 2017). The variety of analyses
includes postcolonial critiques, studies on the existing pedagogical
assumptions within global citizenship education, as well as the need to engage
with alternative paradigms and non-Western perspectives.
Global
citizenship has (for many substantiated reasons) come under scrutiny by several
scholars who argue the associated education to be individualistic, hegemonic,
and problematic in its attempts to universalize practice across local and
national levels. For example, Jooste and Heleta argue that there are border
walls and other realities that create inequalities and inequities between
peoples and nations. In this scenario “whose values and norms will guide global
citizens?” (Jooste and Heleta 2017: 44).
Notwithstanding
its current predicament, global citizenship education does provide the
discursive space that can allow a genuine intercultural understanding of
particularities and specificities where universal assumptions are being made
within education globally. One can argue that a key question that emerges from
these discussions is, “Where and how do we fit in less widely known
perspectives into the discourse and practice of GCE?”
Relevance of alternative paradigms and perspectives to the practice of SDGs in our daily lives
Let’s
re-examine possible alternative paradigms, perspectives, and praxis in
achieving the SDGs. There are two questions that I’d like to pose in relation
to this enquiry.
- Are there different ways in which we might approach issues of social justice? And tied to this question is
- How can we expand our focus from individual empowerment to enable bold collective efforts?
It
is no exaggeration to state that given the heavy dominance of neoliberal
capitalism worldwide and its impact across various national educational policies,
the efforts and plans to tackle the SDGs are largely oriented to empower the
individual human being. While this is important, it also leaves out the
particularities that are also equally important in meeting these goals, such
as, the particularities of culture, of the individual’s needs, interests, and
values.
One
of the guiding questions for my work has been on how education can focus on the
individual but not become individualistic. This to me is a serious concern that
has emerged from the Enlightenment period, Western-scientific-industrial
revolution, and modern capitalism. My long-term study of selected Asian
thinkers shows that their engagement with particularities, values and beliefs
have led to their own creative and distinct strategies and action to create
positive change and sustainable communities within their respective
geographical locales. These are the Indian political
leader, Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948), and the Japanese educators, Tsunesaburo
Makiguchi (1871-1944) and Daisaku Ikeda (b. 1928). These thinkers were also
influenced by and have impacted people globally as leaders. Gandhi is well
known as the political leader who galvanized millions of people to be involved in the
non-violent satyagraha (lit. “truth-force”)
movement for India’s independence from the British regime. Makiguchi and Ikeda’s efforts for peace, culture, and education are now
starting to be recognized worldwide. For example, through Ikeda’s
annual peace proposal through which several suggestions continue to be directed
to the various initiatives by the United Nations. Ikeda is the founder of
several institutions promoting peace, culture, and education. This includes
several kindergartens, primary, and secondary schools, and universities across
the world. He is also the leader of the lay Buddhist organization, the Soka
Gakkai, and the members of the Soka Gakkai International (SGI) across 192
countries and territories have provided support to achieve the UN’s efforts to
build a peaceful and sustainable world within their own communities,
particularities, and daily life. We’ll be hearing more about such related
efforts later during this conference from SGI representatives in this room –
Ms. Joan Anderson, Mr. Tadashi Nagai, Mr. Hiro Sakurai who is the Director of
the SGI Office for UN Affairs, and Monique and Tais from the Soka Institute in
the Amazon.
Moving ahead, with regards to the
discussions on the importance of particularities, in a previous co-authored paper on the topic of sustainable development in
higher education it was suggested that whereas sustainable development has
often been associated with environmental concerns (Morris 2008), an approach to
issues of sustainability from an intercultural perspective can draw from
diverse wisdom and understandings that is in line with UNESCO’s aims for ESD
(Gundara & Sharma 2010). The Earth Charter is a great example of this. It’s worth noting that the success of the Earth Charter and its
adoption by several schools is not only that it offers a comprehensive overview
as an invaluable educational resource, but that as Steve Rockefeller (2008: 20),
Mirian and Peter (Vilela and Corcoran 2005), and others have suggested, and as
Ikeda also points out, “the manner in which this ‘people’s charter’ was drafted
is significant…in the drafting process, efforts were made to incorporate the
essential wisdom of cultures and traditions from all regions of Earth” (Ikeda
2002).
The practice of ESD and efforts to
achieve the SDGs in general can similarly take strides forward through a more
creative engagement with and an understanding that there are a variety of ways
of thinking, acting, being, and living that inform people and communities and
that there are important lessons that can be drawn from the vast repository of
human wisdom.
In a lecture titled “Thoughts on
Education for Global Citizenship” delivered at the Teachers College, Columbia
University in 1996 Ikeda proposes as an essential element of a global citizen
“the wisdom to perceive the interconnectedness of all life and living” (Ikeda
2008: 444). This wisdom, Ikeda notes elsewhere is a “living wisdom” that can be
learned from various cultural traditions that appreciate the unity and
connectedness of life, such as, the Desana people of the Amazon and the
Iroquois people of North America” (Ikeda 2002). One of the consequences of similar
worldviews has led some nations states, including Ireland and India, to give
constitutional rights to trees and rivers as being sacred.
In
a recently published book I have suggested that a shift in paradigm and
perspectives will have a significant bearing on the practice of education for
global citizenship (UNESCO 2015: 14-15). The title of my book is Value-creating
global citizenship education (Sharma 2018) which emphasizes the value that
can be created through bold collective efforts. The book cites the Earth
Charter and draws lessons from the study of my selected thinkers to offer suggestions
to achieve the UN’s 2030 education for global citizenship agenda. To summarize
the many arguments made in this work, value-creating global citizenship
education and the Earth Charter can contribute to this UN goal in at least two
ways. First, as an educational resource through the several lessons learned
from a study of alternative paradigms and perspectives of how we think about
ourselves, society, nature, and the universe. This can add to the intercultural
dimension of GCE and ESD. Second, through the lessons learned from a study of
these movements that have inspired people worldwide to act based on their own
values.
In the realm of education, one of the core challenges of fostering youth as future world citizens needs to be a focus on the values, beliefs, and interests of the individual learner. A broader engagement with the human/personal dimension is necessary for the success of education for global citizenship as mentioned before. These are 6 themes provided for the practice of a value-creating global citizenship education (Sharma 2018: 94) .
- A Sense of Interdependence, Common Humanity, and a Global Outlook
- An Awareness of Climate Change as Planetary Citizens
- A Commitment to Reflective, Dialogic, and Transformative Learning
- A Commitment to Sustainable Development through Intercultural Perspectives
- A Belief in the Value-Creating Capacity for Social-Self Actualization
- An Understanding of Peace and Non-Violence as being Central to the Human Rights Agenda
Within
each theme a brief description is provided that challenges epistemic
assumptions for the practice of global citizenship education that is currently
often based on a neoliberal paradigm. One of the distinctions that can be drawn
between the neoliberal paradigm and a more holistic approach to GCE is the
shift in focus from individual empowerment to building relationships through
the process of ESD, between the learner and his/her natural and social
environment.
I won’t go
into the detail of my in-depth study of these thinkers over two decades across
India, Japan, the UK, and the US (Sharma 1999, 2008, 2018) which I’m happy to
discuss over coffee breaks at this conference. To provide brief insights into
these thinkers and their ideas, for example, Gandhi’s understanding of the
natural world in spiritual terms, his values and beliefs, as well as creative
strategies to use values, such as, non-violence in real world politics, and
enthuse millions of people, including youth in the satyagraha movement, or movement
based on truth force, for India’s independence from the British regime.
Similarly, Makiguchi through his study of the Geography of Human Life arrived
at the understanding of humanitarian competition, making human happiness at the
core of education, that is, in developing the individual’s ability to live
contributively, for the welfare of oneself, nature, and the humanism.
In this presentation I would like to focus on
the contributions made from a study on their ideas and modes of thinking to the
important task of ESD and GCE. Overall, based on my study of Asian perspectives
an acknowledgement of one’s common humanity I have argued, would give emphasis
to perceiving the divisiveness and alienation that is present within modern
societies. That is, it would place a strong emphasis within the curriculum to
tackle stereotyping and foster the socio-emotional capacity of compassion
towards all inhabitants of the earth whilst also recognizing the nature and
forms of power structures in an increasingly globalized world and the unseen
perpetuation of colonial perspectives. The behavioral response to solve global
issues would be rooted in a non-dualistic belief system which perceives an
inextricable link between the self-other-nature-universe. Through an intuitive
examination of the depth of human life such belief systems subscribe to the
view that an attitudinal change within each person can impact upon their
environment (see Ikeda 2003: 106). The emphasis in the educational environment that
subscribe to this way of thinking, such as in the Soka Schools in Japan, aim to
develop and foster meaningful life-to-life connections among people – between
students and teachers, schools and communities, and so on.
Let me elucidate by elaborating on one of the proposed themes in my
recent book, taking the example of “An Awareness of Climate Change as Planetary
Citizens.” One of the influences of the scientific-industrial revolution
originating from the West is a mechanistic and reductionist view of life. On
the other hand, a non-dualistic view, held by these Asian thinkers and also
endorsed by the Earth Charter, perceives the dynamic relationship between the
self and the natural/ social environment as being fluid and in a constant state
of creative engagement and coexistence.[1] While
the wisdom and energy to take action in tackling climate change are perceived
here as being important, it should also be with an attitude of reverence for
life as suggested in the Earth Charter that resonates with Makiguchi’s
sentiments described
in his work Jinsei chirigaku or the Geography of Human Life (Makiguchi
1983).
Moving
beyond a cognitive approach, education for climate change should create a
learning environment that can cause a socio-emotional response in students to
develop a reverence for nature, and care and responsibility as citizens of this
planet. Further, climate change is not just about the natural environment, but
the human environment as well. A critical understanding is required of the
causal relationship between human strife and suffering, and the destruction of
natural and other forms of life (the Syrian crises and conflicts in the Middle
East are among such examples). As a starting point the following references are
suggested in my work as an approach these issues from a value-creating
perspective: Henderson and Ikeda’s (2004) dialogue Planetary citizens;
Makiguchi’s (1983) book, The geography of human life (Bethel 2002
for an edited English translation; also see Bethel 2000; Takeuchi 2004), the Earth
charter initiative[2]
(also see Rockefeller 2015), and UNESCO’s climate change education and
awareness initiatives[3].
Let me recapitulate the recommendations being made from a study of value-creating global citizenship education and the Earth Charter for the UN 2030 global citizenship agenda:
- A broader engagement with the human/personal dimension is necessary for the success of education for global citizenship which is part of the UN’s 2030 agenda and its 17 SDGs. This would fill the present gap within UNESCO’s proposals for sustainable development (including SDG 13) by adding the personal dimension to the currently proposed economic, social, and environmental dimensions (see UNESCO 2018: 3).
- VCGCE as a complementary approach to the three key pedagogical approaches in ESD currently offered by UNESCO, which are, “a learner-centered approach,” “action-oriented learning,” and “transformative learning” (UNESCO 2017: 55).
- An emphasis on building relationships through ESD between the individual learner and her/his natural and social environment by engaging with the personal dimension.
- Lessons learned from movements inspired by the Earth Charter, Gandhi, and Ikeda to help expand the current focus within GCE and ESD from individual empowerment to enable bold collective efforts.
- Some efforts are being made to re-engage with ESD from more holistic perspectives of my three selected thinkers (see BRC 1997a & b; Sakurai 2010; Sarabhai, Raghunathan, and Modi 2010). These efforts need to be combined with more serious scholarly engagement that can draw the attention of policy makers and practitioners to explore the relevance of diverse perspectives to sustain human and universal life that exists on our planet.
Value-creating global citizens
To wrap up my
talk I would like to propose three guiding notions to navigate a creative
process of acting,
thinking, and being a value-creating global citizen. This is something we can
start by reflecting on and taking action at this conference and in the future.
- An active citizen – there are a variety of ways in which we ourselves can engage with the SDGs as an active citizen. The various presentations and discussions within groups at this conference provide an invaluable opportunity to learn and be inspired by the amazing work being done by the attendees.
- A creative citizen – I hope that in these ensuing discussions this week we can create the momentum through which the research and practice of the SDGs moves from the current focus on individual empowerment to a more collective effort to achieve these goals.
- An inclusive citizen – to read/listen/experience what is beyond our usual spectrum of engagements.
On the third point of being an inclusive citizen,
Ikeda in his 2018 peace proposal suggests that in this age of technology we are
now faced with what the Internet activist, Eli Pariser calls the “filter bubble.”
That is, “data searches that return information already attuned to the user’s
preferences, thus obscuring other sources” (Ikeda 2018: 11). “What is
troubling about this phenomenon,” Ikeda mentions, “is the degree to which it
can impact a person’s understanding of social issues” (ibid.) The last US
Presidential elections and the political climate ever since has had worrying
consequences, such as, the US withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate
change in 2017, acts of violence, prejudice, and other anomalies that impact
the practice of SDGs. Gandhi spoke of “ahimsa (non-violence) of the
brave.”[4] There
is much to be learned from the bold
action taken to combat climate change by Costa Rica, such as, the efforts for land
protection which is the one of the world’s best climate change practices, and
also the country’s offer to host the COP25 – 2019 UN Climate Change Conference,
and other such noble endeavors. And so, thank you once again for the
invitation to contribute to and learn from not just the discussions at this
conference but importantly, from the example and ethos of the ECI and this
nation that is taking strides to create a more sustainable and peaceful world.
Endnotes
[1] See Sharma
2018, Chapter 4 for further details.
[2] http://earthcharter.org/discover/the-earth-charter/
[3]https://en.unesco.org/themes/addressing-climate-change/climate-change-education-and-awareness
[4] https://www.mkgandhi.org/nonviolence/phil1.htm
References
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus
critical global citizenship education. Development Education: Policy and
Practice, 3(Autumn), 83-98.
Andreotti,
V. (2011). Actionable postcolonial theory in education. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Andreotti,
V., & de Souza, L. (Eds.). (2012). Postcolonial perspectives on
global citizenship education. New York: Routledge.
Bethel, D. M. (2000). The legacy
of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi: Value creating education and global citizenship. In
D. Machacek & B. Wilson (Eds.), Global citizens: The Soka Gakkai
Buddhist movement in the world (pp. 42–66). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bethel, D. M. (Ed.). (2002). The
geography of human life. San Francisco: Caddo Gap Press.
Bowden, B. (2003). The perils of
global citizenship. Citizenship Studies, 7, 349-362.
BRC, Boston Research Center for
the 21st Century. (1997a). Buddhist perspectives on the Earth
Charter. Cambridge, MA: Boston Research Center for the 21st
Century.
BRC,
Boston Research Center for the 21st Century. (1997b). Women’s views
on the Earth Charter. Cambridge, MA: Boston Research Center for the 21st
Century.
Calhoun, C. (2002). The class
consciousness of frequent travelers: Toward a critique of actually existing
cosmopolitanism. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101, 869-897.
Dill, J.S. (2013). The longings
and limits of global citizenship education: The modern pedagogy of schooling in
a cosmopolitan age. New York: Routledge.
Gaudelli, W. (2016). Global
citizenship education: Everyday transcendence. New York: Routledge.
Gundara,
J.S., & Sharma, N. (2010). Interculturalism, sustainable development and
higher education institutions. International
Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 2(2), 23-34.
Ikeda,
D. (2002).The challenge of global empowerment: Education for a sustainable
future. Retrieved from
http://www.sgi.org/about-us/president-ikedas-proposals/environmental-proposal-2002.html
Ikeda,
D. (2003). Unlocking the mysteries of birth and death…and everything in between:
A Buddhist view of life (2nd ed.). Santa Monica, CA: Middleway Press.
Ikeda,
D. (2008). Thoughts on education for global citizenship. In My dear friends
in America: Collected U.S. Addresses 1990-1996 (2nd ed.) (pp. 441-451).
Santa Monica, CA: World Tribune Press.
Ikeda,
D. (2018). Toward an era of human rights: Building a people’s movement.
Retrieved from http://www.daisakuikeda.org/assets/files/peaceproposal2018.pdf
Jooste,
N., & Heleta, S. (2017). Global citizenship versus globally competent
graduates: A critical view from the south. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 21(1),39-51.
Makiguchi,
T. (1983). Jinsei chirigaku [The geography of human life]. Makiguchi
Tsunesaburo zenshu [Complete works of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi] (Vols. 1–2).
Tokyo: Daisan Bunmeisha.
Merryfield,
M. (2009). Moving the center of global education: From imperial worldviews that
divide the world to double consciousness, contrapuntal pedagogy, hybridity, and
cross- cultural competence. In T.F. Kirkwood-Tucker, (Ed.), Visions in
global education (pp. 215-239). New York: Peter Lang.
National Institute for Educational Policy
Research (NIER) and Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and
Technology (MEXT) (March 26, 2005). Proceedings from International Symposium on
Education Reform: Sustainable development and education for the 21st
century – What we can do now for the children of the future – An educational
paradigm shift. Tokyo: Japan.
Rockefeller,
S.C. (2008). Charting principles for the Earth Charter. In P.B. Corcoran &
A.J. Wohlpart (Eds.), A voice for earth: American writers respond to the
Earth Charter (pp. 3-23). Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press.
Sakurai,
H. (2010). Make a world of difference: Hearing each other, healing the earth. Journal
of Education for Sustainable Development, 4(2), 283–286. DOI: 10.1177/097340821000400217
Sarabhai,
K., Raghunathan, & M., Modi, A., (2010). Earth charter and Gandhi:
Towards a sustainable world. Ahmedabad: Center for Environment Education.
Sharma,
N. (1999). Value creators in education: Japanese educator Makiguchi &
Mahatma Gandhi and their relevance for the Indian education (2nd ed.). New
Delhi: Regency Publications.
Sharma, N. (2008). Makiguchi and Gandhi:
Their educational relevance for the 21st Century. Lanham,
Maryland: University Press of America, Rowman & Littlefield.
Sharma,
N. (2018). Value-creating global citizenship education: Engaging Gandhi,
Makiguchi, and Ikeda as examples. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Takeuchi,
K. (2004). The significance of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei Chirigaku
(Geography of Human Life) in the intellectual history of geography in Japan:
Commemorating the centenary of its publication. The Journal of Oriental
Studies, 14, 112–132.
Tarozzi,
M., & Torres, C.A. (2016). Global citizenship education and the crises
of multiculturalism: Comparative perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Torres,
C.A. (2017). Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global
citizenship education. New York: Routledge.
UNESCO,
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (2015). Global
citizenship education: Topics and learning objectives. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO,
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2017). Education
for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO,
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2018). Preparing
teachers for global citizenship education: A template. Paris: UNESCO.
Vilela,
M., & Corcoran, P.B. (2005). Building consensus on shared values. In P. B.
Corcoran, M. Vilela, & A. Roerink (Eds.), The Earth Charter in action:
Toward a sustainable world (pp. 17-22). Amsterdam: KIT Publishers.
Wang,
C., & Hoffman, D. M. (2016). Are WE the world? A critical reflection
on selfhood and global citizenship education. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 24(56).