The Environmental Commons in Urban Communities: The Potential of Place-Based Education

Abstract

The reflections of 205 4–12th graders (most from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds) on what they learned from participating in place-based stewardship education (PBSE) projects in their urban communities were analyzed. All projects involved hands-on collective learning/action by teams of students, teachers, and community partners in the communities where students attended school. Reflections were analyzed using an iterative process of deductive and inductive coding and identifying emergent themes. Deductive coding was informed by the authors’ earlier theoretical and empirical studies on the environmental commons (EC) and the key principles outlined in Elinor Ostrom’s work on effective group practices for stewarding common pool resources. Reflections were coded for up to 8 discrete references to the two elements of the environmental commons: (1) the natural resources on which life depends (awareness of nature in the urban space; nature’s diversity and ecological balance; interdependence of humans with nature; healthy environments and species’ well-being; students’ environmental identities; and human impact and agency); and (2) collective actions to protect a community’s resources (benefits and responsibilities of team work; within-group dynamics and civic skills; collective efficacy; generativity; and identification with the broader community). We found that students articulated, with varying levels of understanding, the two key EC elements. Most referred to positive human impact and one-third mentioned negative human impact. When discussing the community benefitting from their work, a majority mentioned humans; yet nearly half referred to other species or living systems; and a quarter referenced generativity, i.e., the legacy of their work for the future. Concerning the collective orientation of projects: one-third felt collective action was imperative for solving environmental issues, half expressed feelings of collective efficacy, and over one-third referenced their increased attachment and identification with a broader community (school, city, or nature). Core practices in this PBSE model parallel the elements of effective groups identified by Ostrom. We conclude with a discussion of the potential of PBSE projects in urban communities for developing young people’s sense of the public realm more broadly and their stake in the natural environment and their communities.

Responding to the Impacts of the Climate Crisis on Children and Youth

“…Many schools and community groups provide programs that engage children in such activities, but few include a research or evaluation component. One exception—though it is not focused on climate change—is work that involves eco‐justice education through place‐based stewardship programs with children and youth, often in poor and marginalized urban contexts (Flanagan, Gallay, Pykett, & Smallwood, ). Through local environmental projects, participants developed greater awareness and appreciation of the natural world and the value of collective action.…”

Meaning in Life Mediates the Association between Environmental Engagement and Loneliness

“…Pro-environmental activities can be perceived as meaningful and intrinsic experiences with nature [ 8 , 9 ]. For example, Marshall et al [ 10 ] found that pro-environmental behaviors and climate change beliefs were related to a set of altruistic orientations such as understanding, empathy, and concerns for others.…”

Planting a Seed of Experience – Long Term Effects of a Co-curricular Ecogarden-Based Program in Higher Education in Hong Kong

“…Within the environmental themes, the codes could be broadly classified into two subthemes attitudinal and behavioral changes ( Figure 4 ), which were related to the realization of students on the two elements of the collective importance of the environment ( Flanagan et al, 2019 ), ‘the natural resources on which life depends’ and ‘collective actions to protect a community’s resources.’…”

“…Indeed, innovative teaching methods are needed to facilitate students’ learning and experience of concepts of sustainability and to foster a pro-sustainability attitude amongst them ( Ely, 2018 ). In recent years, ever more pedagogies have proved effective in arousing students’ environmental awareness and nurturing their environmentally conscious attitudes, such as problem-based and project-based learning ( Cörvers et al, 2016 ; Leal Filho et al, 2016 ), nature-based and/or outdoor experiential learning ( Lugg, 2007 ; Krasny and Delia, 2015 ), place-based education ( Flanagan et al, 2019 ) and service-based learning ( Zint et al, 2014 ). Other representative pedagogies, such as the jigsaw approach to collaborative learning and mind mapping, were also summarized by Lozano et al (2017) , with corresponding competencies reviewed.…”

“…To nurture the pro-environmental awareness, attitudes and behavior of undergraduates at a university in Hong Kong with an ecogarden on campus, a non-formal co-curricular educational program was implemented at the university. GBL is the overarching pedagogy of this ongoing program, with nine sub-pedagogies ( Table 1 and Figure 1 ), such as nature-based ( Pérez-López et al, 2020 ), place-based ( Flanagan et al, 2019 ) and service-based sub-pedagogies ( Gaylie, 2009 ; Walter, 2013 ; Cheang et al, 2017 ). The training program, called the Ecogarden Farmer and Biodiversity Surveyor, has been in place at the university since 2015, with the objectives of (1) increasing the participants’ (both undergraduates and postgraduates) knowledge of organic farming and biodiversity surveys; (2) arousing students’ interest in and awareness of organic farming, biodiversity conservation and issues of sustainable development; and (3) developing students’ guiding and mentoring skills.…”