The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between national economic and political priorities and environmental education policy formulation and curriculum strategies. This relationship will be placed in the historical context of developments in environmental education in Australia from 1970 until the present and will be analysed in terms of the ideological and pedagogical stances implicit, and explicit, in the developments during this period. I will argue that the emphasis throughout the period has been to sustain the development of environmental education without any questioning of why, what and how this development should occur.

‘Sustainable development’ has become a slogan for governments, industry and conservation groups in recent times. It was the subtitle for the World Conservation Strategy (IUCN 1980) and the National Conservation Strategy for Australia (DHAE 1984) - living resource conservation for sustainable development - and was popularised in the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, more commonly known as the Brundtland Report or Our Common Future (WCED 1987). The definition of sustainable development given in the World Conservation Strategy (IUCN 1980: section 1.3) and repeated in the National Conservation Strategy for Australia (DHAE 1984: 12) is as follows:

In 1980-81 when I last wrote about the future of environmental education in Australian schools I was quite pessimistic and concluded that environmental education had been a phenomenon of the affluent seventies in Australia. This conclusion was based on observations, reading and experience with schools, education authorities and curriculum projects over the preceding seven years.

Environmental education aims to develop not only awareness, understanding and skills. Most importantly, it also aims to encourage feelings of concern for the environment and protection. This means that it is concerned with social reconstruction — environmental education programs must have moral and political components if they are to achieve the accepted aims of environmental education. In 1980-81 I argued that environmental education had been subjected to incorporation within the existing hegemoney of schools in a neutralised form — the radical ‘action’ components of the environmental education aims had been deleted from school programs whilst the less controversial cognitive and skill aims had been retained, together with the name ‘environmental education’. There was evidence that programs of this genre had increased during the seventies, including an increased environmental content in traditional subjects in the curriculum. In general terms there was little inducement for schools to implement all the aims of environmental education.

This article charts the history of environmental education over four decades - from the 1960s to 2006 - as a rocky road of determined chocolate with the possibilities of rocks (nuts) and easy passage (marshmallow). There were distractions such as suggestions of changing names and new directions (add fruit?) along the way but the road has continued to be well travelled. The article concludes that there is much in common with where we have come from (the 1975 Belgrade Charter) and where we stand now (in year 2 of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development). Where next?

Science education in the Australian primary school curriculum is a relatively rare event. Several studies over the past twenty five years have all reported disappointingly low amounts of science being taught and the reluctance of primary school teachers to make science a priority in their teaching. Similar outcomes have been reported for environmental education. Even though primary aged children are very interested in science and the environment, primary school teachers often struggle to teach science/environmental education because they are not confident and competent in the content, lack curriculum resources and equipment, have inadequate time to prepare, and have difficulty finding a place for science/environmental education in what they perceive as an already overcrowded curriculum. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the experiences of primary schools involved in the Victorian Science in Schools Research Project which was concerned with improving science teaching and learning strategies but which also unexpectedly led to more environmental (“sustainability”) education occurring. The paper will also suggest a curriculum strategy for achieving more widespread acceptance and implementation of “sustainability education” through primary school science curricula.

The Australian Journal of Environmental Education (AJEE), first published in 1984, is a rich source for investigating the history of environmental education in Australia, as it has sampled research and writings in the field since the Australian Association for Environmental Education (AAEE) was established in 1980.

Documenting a history of environmental education in Australia within an international context has been a research focus (some would say obsession) of mine since 1974, when I undertook a ‘needs for environmental education’ survey for the Curriculum Development Centre. Given the human-centred issues that launched the field (clean air and water, population), it was disturbing to see how it became characterised as nature focused from the 1990s onwards, to distinguish it from education for sustainable development (ESD). As we now look post-decade, we find that ESD is not yet integrated into mainstream education and sustainable development agendas, and the need to promote global citizenship is being added to the agenda. Most of the UNESCO priority action areas from 2014 look very familiar: policy support, whole-institution approaches, educators and local communities. The fifth area is Youth, a category that emerged in its own right for the first time in Agenda 21. Having been in this historical space for so long, I expect I will continue to document a history of the field for as long as I can, to see where the journey leads us.