Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Critical Reading of Ecocentrism and Its Meta-Scientific Use of Ecology: Instrumental Versus Emancipatory Approaches in Environmental Education and Ecology Education

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to make a critical reading of ecocentrism and its meta-scientific use of ecology. First, basic assumptions of ecocentrism will be examined, which involve nature’s intrinsic value, postmodern and modern positions in ecocentrism, and the subject-object dichotomy under the lenses of ecocentrism. Then, we will discuss implications for environmental education and ecology education including a contradistinction between the instrumental and the emancipatory approach and the study of socio-scientific issues. An outline of protected areas as a socio-scientific issue, which is informed by the emancipatory approach, will be presented in the final part of the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Defining labor as a distinguishing feature of the human species (Ott 2009), the transformation of nature through labor can be seen as a constitutional characteristic of human societies. According to this position, no society can sustain or reproduce itself unless it transforms nature by making use of natural resources. Anthropocentrism and ecocentrism refer to how human conduct can be justified and which should be the desired relationship between society and nature (see ‘Introduction’, 3rd paragraph, and ‘Basic assumptions of ecocentrism’). Even in the frame of ecocentrism it is acknowledged that the intercourse between human societies and nature has to involve at least some marginal use of natural resources by humans (Gruen 2002; Stenmark 2002; Hay 2010). Although a natural resource used by humans might not be used by other species (e.g., fossil fuels), using natural resources transforms nature and that is often accompanied by a number of intended (e.g., extraction of fossil fuels and production of use value) or unwanted and unknown consequences (e.g., change of the landscape where fossil fuels are extracted, air pollution, global warming, etc.).

  2. Although humans are natural—as with any other animal species—there is a crucial difference between the natural realm on the one side, and the social realm, on the other. Namely, human action does not always proceed under the guidance of instincts. Instead, human beings and societies are distinguished from non-human beings and non-human biocommunities in the fact that the result of human action, either individual or collective, is pre-shaped, represented, in human thought or communication, before that action has been enacted (Hale 2003). This conceptualization is related to presenting humans as active, purposefully and creatively thinking beings (Cohen-Cole 2005; Stotz 2010).

  3. Environmental education and ecology education are not used interchangeably but they are referred to as distinct fields. However, new developments that build on the notion of socio-scientific issues offer the opportunity for a ‘mutual’ relationship between environmental education and ecology education (see Sect. 4.2: ‘Socio-scientific issues in environmental education and ecology education’, first two paragraphs).

  4. Much of the debate about the environment and the relationship between human societies and nature has been related to either rural or urban residence, political affiliation, or religious beliefs (Hoffman and Sandelands 2005; San-Juan in press). Specifically, anti-environmentalism has been often connected to rural residence (Skogen and Krange 2003), right-wing political affiliation (Dunlap 2006), or Christian fundamentalism (Tokar 1995). However, recent trends indicate that there is an extended diffusion of the environmentalist discourse (Hovardas and Korfiatis 2008; Buijs et al. in press). The adoption of core environmentalist claims is seen in some cases as an attempt to build on cultural capital that certain social groups are lacking (e.g., local people in protected areas) and to accommodate a ‘politically correct’ view (Skogen and Thrane 2008). For instance, recent research confirmed the pervasiveness of the ‘balance-of-nature’ metaphor among adolescents with an ‘anti-wolf’ orientation (Hovardas and Korfiatis in press).

  5. Ecocentrism is different from biocentrism in that the former grants intrinsic value to natural systems, e.g. ecosystems, while the latter grants intrinsic value to non-human individuals or species (Almeida and Vasconcelos in press).

  6. Since the 1980’s, a dynamic vision of the natural world was introduced in the scientific community where ecosystems came to be recognized as inherently dynamic and heterogeneous, presenting multiple equilibria, stochastic processes, and destabilizing forces (Des Jardins 2005; Jelinski 2005). Perhaps the most important change in this shifting paradigm in ecology was that there was no single or persistent balance of nature and that balance was not to be seen any more as an organizing principle of nature but as the outcome of materialistic forces acting under specific conditions and specific temporal and spatial scales (Kolasa and Pickett 2005). Hovardas and Korfiatis (2011) presented a detailed account of the ‘balance-of-nature’ metaphor and outlined an exemplary educational intervention for high school students to critically revisit the notion of ‘balance’ (see also Sect. 4.3: ‘Outline of protected areas as a socio-scientific issue’, 4th paragraph).

  7. Endorsing ecocentrism (philosophical stance) cannot be equated to following an instrumental approach (educational arrangement). However, uncritical and unreflective adoption of ecocentrism by educators is highly likely to be followed by an instrumental approach provided that educators will most probably strive towards pre-determined ends in terms of students’ environmental values (e.g., promoting intrinsic valuation of nature).

  8. Emancipatory approaches in environmental education and ecology education should involve a critical examination of all accounts, either anthropocentric or ecocentric.

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1985). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, A., & Vasconcelos, C. (in press). Teachers’ perspectives on the human nature relationship: Implications for environmental education. Research in Science Education.

  • Bäckstrand, K. (2004). Scientisation vs. civic expertise in environmental governance: Eco-feminist, eco-modern and post-modern responses. Environmental Politics, 13, 695–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. R. (2004). Creating green citizens? Political liberalism and environmental education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38, 37–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E., Yoon, S., Perris, K., & van Oostveen, R. (2003). Science-specialist student-teachers consider promoting technological design projects: Contributions of multi-media case methods. Research in Science Education, 33, 163–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnett, M. (2000). Environmental concern and the metaphysics of education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 34, 591–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, B. (2006). Two concepts of intrinsic value. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 9, 111–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buijs, A., Hovardas, T., Figari, H., Castro, P., Devine-Wright, P., Fischer, A., Mouro, C., & Selge, S. (in press). Understanding people’s ideas on natural resource management: Research on social representations of nature. Society and Natural Resources.

  • Callicott, J. B., Acevedo, M., Gunter, P., Harcombe, P., Lindquist, C., & Monticino, M. (2006). Biocomplexity in the big thicket. Ethics, Place and Environment, 9, 21–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carleton-Hug, A., & Hug, J. W. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for evaluating environmental education programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33, 159–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caro, T., Mulder, M. B., & Moore, M. (2003). Effects of conservation education on reasons to conserve biological diversity. Biological Conservation, 114, 143–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, D. (2004). Moral values and the arts in environmental education: Towards an ethic of aesthetic appreciation. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38, 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castree, N. (2003). A post-environmental ethics? Ethics, Place and Environment, 6, 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, P. (2006). Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: Contributions from the social representations approach. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaloupka, W. (2008). The environmentalist: ‘what is to be done?’. Environmental Politics, 17, 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Cole, J. (2005). The reflexivity of cognitive science: The scientist as model of human nature. History of the Human Sciences, 18, 107–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colucci-Gray, L., Camino, E., Barbiero, G., & Gray, D. (2006). From scientific literacy to sustainability literacy: An ecological framework for education. Science Education, 90, 227–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, G. (2001). Must there be a balance of nature? Biology and Philosophy, 16, 481–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, J. B. (2006). Communicating nature—How we create and understand environmental messages. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordero, A. (2009). Contemporary science and worldview-making. Science & Education, 18, 747–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curry, P. (2006). Ecological ethics—An introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daugstad, K., Svarstad, H., & Vistad, O. I. (2006). A case of conflicts in conservation: Two trenches or a three-dimensional complexity? Landscape Research, 31, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, B. A., & Monroe, M. C. (Eds.). (2000). Environmental education & communication for a sustainable world. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Steiguer, J. E. (2006). The origins of modern environmental thought. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Des Jardins, J. R. (2005). Scientific ecology and ecological ethics: The challenges of drawing ethical conclusions from scientific facts. In E. Johnson & M. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 31–49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, J., & Scott, W. (2002). Editorial—Perspectives on environmental education—Related research in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1111–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, J., & Wals, A. E. J. (2006). On the danger of blurring methods, methodologies and ideologies in environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 12, 549–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingler, J. (2005a). The discursive nature of nature: Towards a post-modern concept of nature. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7, 209–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingler, J. (2005b). Natur als text: Grundlagen eines poststrukturalistischen Naturbegriffs. In C. Gersdorf & S. Mayer (Eds.), Natur—Kultur—Text. Beiträge zu Ökologie und Literaturwissenschaft (pp. 29–52). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, A. (2003). Citizenship and the environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, R. E. (2006). Show us the data: The questionable empirical foundations of ‘‘The Death of Environmentalism’’ thesis. Organization and Environment, 19, 88–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 43, 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, J. A., & Monroe, M. (2006). The effects of environment-based education on students’ critical thinking skills and disposition toward critical thinking. Environmental Education Research, 12, 429–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geneletti, D., Bagli, S., Napolitano, P., & Pistocchi, A. (2007). Spatial decision support for strategic environmental assessment of land use plans. A case study in southern Italy. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 408–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, A. (2002). Mutualism: A different agenda for environmental and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1201–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruen, L. (2002). Refocusing environmental ethics: From intrinsic value to endorsable valuations. Philosophy and Geography, 5, 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, L. H., & Holling, C. S. (2002). Panarchy. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadzidaki, P. (2008a). Quantum mechanics’ and ‘scientific explanation’—An explanatory strategy aiming at providing ‘understanding. Science & Education, 17, 49–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadzidaki, P. (2008b). The Heisenberg microscope: A powerful instructional tool for promoting meta-cognitive and meta-scientific thinking on quantum mechanics and the ‘nature of science’. Science & Education, 17, 613–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hailwood, S. (2005). Environmental citizenship as reasonable citizenship. Environmental Politics, 14, 195–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, P. J. (2003). Labor and the human relationship with nature: The naturalization of politics in the work of Thomas Henry Huxley, Herbert George Wells, and William Morris. Journal of the History of Biology, 36, 249–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, K. (2004). Monsters of modernity: Frankenstein and modern environmentalism. Cultural geographies, 11, 181–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harold, J. (2005). Between intrinsic and extrinsic value. Journal of Social Philosophy, 36, 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C., & Burges, J. (2000). Valuing nature in context: The contribution of common-good approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation, 9, 1115–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, R. (2010). The relevance of ecocentrism, personal development and transformational leadership to sustainability and identity. Sustainable Development, 18, 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heimlich, J. E. (2010). Environmental education evaluation: Reinterpreting education as a strategy for meeting mission. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33, 180–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. J., & Sandelands, L. E. (2005). Getting right with nature: Anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, and theocentrism. Organization and Environment, 18, 141–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecological Systems, 4, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornborg, A. (2006). Animism, fetishism, and objectivism as strategies for knowing (or not knowing) the world. Ethnos, 71, 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovardas, T. (2005). Social representations on ecotourism—Scheduling interventions in protected areas. Thessaloniki, Greece: Aristotle University, School of Biology, PhD Thesis in Greek with an English summary.

  • Hovardas, T. (2010). The contribution of social science research to the management of the Dadia Forest Reserve: Nature’s face in society’s mirror. In C. Catsadorakis, & Kälander (Eds.), The Dadia-Lefkimi-Soufli Forest National Park, Greece: Biodiversity, Management, and Conservation (pp 253–263). Athens: WWF-International.

  • Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (in press). Adolescents’ beliefs about the wolf: Investigating the potential of human—wolf coexistence in the European south. Society and Natural Resources.

  • Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2008). Framing environmental policy by the local press: Case study from the Dadia Forest Reserve, Greece. Forest Policy and Economics, 10, 316–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2011). Towards a critical re-appraisal of ecology education: Scheduling an educational intervention to revisit the ‘Balance of Nature’ metaphor. Science & Education, 20, 1039–1053.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckle, J. (2006). Education for sustainable development: A briefing paper for the training and development agency for schools. Retrieved from http://john.huckle.org.uk/publications_downloads.jsp.

  • Hull, R. B., Richert, D., Seekamp, E., Robertson, D., & Buhyoff, G. J. (2003). Understandings of environmental quality: ambiguities and values held by environmental professionals. Environmental Management, 31, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelinski, D. E. (2005). There is no mother nature—There is no balance of nature: Culture, ecology and conservation. Human Ecology, 33, 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jickling, B., & Wals, A. E. J. (2008). Globalization and environmental education: Looking beyond sustainable development. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P. C., & Merritt, J. Q. (1999). The TALESSI project: Promoting active learning for interdisciplinarity, values awareness and critical thinking in environmental higher education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 23, 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, P. C., Merritt, J. Q., & Palmer, C. (1999). Critical thinking and interdisciplinarity in environmental higher education: The case for epistemological and values awareness. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 23, 349–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahriman-Ozturk, D., Olgan, R., & Tuncer, G. (2012). A qualitative study on Turkish preschool children’s environmental attitudes through ecocentrism and anthropocentrism. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 629–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson, R. (2006). Reducing asymmetries in intergenerational justice: Descent from modernity or space industrialization? Organization and Environment, 19, 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpiak, C. P., & Baril, G. L. (2008). Moral reasoning and concern for the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keene, M., & Blumstein, D. T. (2010). Environmental education: A time of change, a time for change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33, 201–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klosterman, M. L., Sadler, T. D., & Brown, J. (2012). Science teachers’ use of mass media to address socio-scientific and sustainability issues. Research in Science Education, 42, 51–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolasa, J., & Pickett, S. T. A. (2005). Changing academic perspectives of ecology: A view from within. In E. Johnson & M. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 50–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korfiatis, K. J. (2005). Environmental education and the science of ecology: Exploration of an uneasy relationship. Environmental Education Research, 11, 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korfiatis, K. J., Stamou, A. G., & Paraskevopoulos, S. (2004). Images of nature in Greek primary school textbooks. Science Education, 88, 72–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korfiatis, K.J., Hovardas, T., Tsaliki, E., & Palmer, J. A. (2009). Rural children’s views on human activities and changes in a Greek protected wetland. Society and Natural Resources, 22, 339–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kortenkamp, K. V., & Moore, C. F. (2001). Ecocentrism and anthropocentrism: Moral reasoning about ecological commons dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laws, D., Scholz, R., Shiroyama, H., Susskind, L., Suzuki, T., & Weber, O. (2004). Expert views on sustainability and technology implementation. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 11, 247–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1267–1287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovelock, J. (1979). Gaia: A new look at life on earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovelock, J. (1988). The ages of Gaia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, M., & Vallés, J. (2007). An analysis of the implementation of an environmental management system in a local public administration. Journal of Environmental Management, 82, 495–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundholm, C., & Plummer, R. (2010). Resilience and learning: A conspectus for environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 16, 475–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masozera, M. K., Alavalapati, J. R. R., Jacobson, S. K., & Shrestha, R. K. (2006). Assessing the suitability of community-based management for the Nyungwe Forest Reserve, Rwanda. Forest Policy and Economics, 8, 206–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, D. G., & Spanos, A. (2006). Philosophical scrutiny of evidence of risks: From bioethics to bioevidence. Philosophy of Science, 73, 803–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, J. R. (2000). Something new under the Sun: An environmental history of the twentieth-century world. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. B., & Mueller, M. P. (2011). A philosophical analysis of David Orr’s theory of ecological literacy: biophilia, ecojustice and moral education in school learning communities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 193–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen, F. (1997). Critical thinking: A central element in developing action competence in health and environmental education. Health Education Research, 12, 429–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muecke, S. (2009). Cultural science? The ecological critique of modernity and the conceptual habitat of the humanities. Cultural Studies, 23, 404–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natter, W., & Zierhofer, W. (2002). Political ecology, territoriality and scale. GeoJournal, 58, 225–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, D. W. (1994). Earth in mind. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, P. (2009). World and earth: Hannah Arendt and the human relationship to nature. Ethics, Place and Environment, 12, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panetta, E. M., & Condit, C. M. (1995). Ecocentrism and argumentative competence: Roots of a postmodern argument theory from the Brazilian deforestation debate. Argumentation, 9, 203–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, P. G. (2010). The globally great moral challenge: Ecocentric democracy, values, morals and meaning. Environmental Education Research, 16, 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, D. (2007). Tensions and dilemmas of ecotopianism. Environmental Values, 16(2007), 289–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). The status of the ‘material’ in theories of culture: from ‘social structure’ to ‘artefacts’. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 32, 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, E. M. (2005). Field-based education and indigenous knowledge: Essential components of geosciences education for Native American communities. Science Education, 89, 296–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robottom, I. (2012). Socio-scientific issues in education: Innovative practices and contending epistemologies. Research in Science Education, 42, 95–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolston, H. (1989). Philosophy gone wild. Buffalo, NY: Promitheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33, 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004a). The morality of socio-scientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004b). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socio-scientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the National Association for Research in science Teaching, Vancouver, BC.

  • San-Juan, C. (in press). Rethinking psychosocial interventions in natural disasters: Lessons from holistic ecocentrism and religious beliefs. Journal of Religion and Health.

  • Schinkel, A. (2009). Justifying compulsory environmental education in liberal democracies. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 43, 507–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlottmann, C. (2008). Educational Ethics and the DESD: Considering trade-offs. Theory and Research in Education, 6, 207–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, H. (1989). The rationality of science, critical thinking and science education. Synthese, 80, 9–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, L. (2011). Questions socialment vives and socio-scientific issues: New trends of research to meet the training needs of post modern society. In 9th International conference of the European Science Education Research Association. Lyon, ESERA 2011.

  • Skogen, K., & Krange, O. (2003). A wolf at the gate: The anti-carnivore alliance and the symbolic construction of community. Sociologia Ruralis, 43, 309–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skogen, K., & Thrane, C. (2008). Wolves in context: Using survey data to situate attitudes within a wider cultural framework. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 17–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slabbert, J. A., & Hattingh, A. (2006). ‘Where is the post-modern truth we have lost in reductionist knowledge?’ A curriculum’s epitaph. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 701–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slife, B. D. (2005). The Kant of psychology: Joseph Rychlak and the bridge to postmodern psychology. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18, 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slingsby, D., & Barker, K. (2003). Making connections: Biology, environmental education and education for sustainable development. Journal of Biological Education, 28, 4–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrakakis, Y. (1997). Green fantasy and the real of nature: elements of a Lacanian critique of green ideological discourse. Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture and Society, 2, 123–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenmark, M. (2002). The relevance of environmental ethical theories for policy making. Environmental Ethics, 24, 135–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, P. H. G. (2004). Nature and human liberty. Organization and Environment, 17, 76–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K. (2010). Human nature and cognitive–developmental niche construction. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 9, 483–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swart, J. A. A., van der Windt, H. J., & Keularzt, J. (2001). Valuation of nature in conservation and restoration. Restoration Ecology, 9, 230–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, I. (2009). Critical thinking, transformative learning, sustainable education, and problem-based learning in universities. Journal of Transformative Education, 7, 245–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tokar, B. (1995). The “Wise Use’ backlash: Responding to militant anti-environmentalism. Ecologist, 25, 150–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomas, L., & Ritchie, S. M. (2012). Positive emotional responses to hybridised writing about a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 42, 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulanowicz, R. E. (1999). Life after Newton: An ecological metaphysic. BioSystems, 50, 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Weelie, D., & Wals, A. E. J. (2002). Making biodiversity meaningful through environmental education. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1143–1156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A. E. J. (2010). Between knowing what is right and knowing that is it wrong to tell others what is right: On relativism, uncertainty and democracy in environmental and sustainability education. Environmental Education Research, 16, 143–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A. E. J., & Corcoran, P. B. (2006). Sustainability as an outcome of transformative learning. In J. Holmberg & B. E. Samuelsson (Eds.), Drivers and barriers for implementing sustainable development in higher education (Education for Sustainable Development in Action, Technical Paper 3, pp. 103–108). Paris: UNESCO.

  • Wals, A. E. J., Geerling-Eijff, F., Hubeek, F., van der Kroon, S., & Vader, J. (2008). All mixed up? Instrumental and emancipatory learning toward a more sustainable world: Considerations for EE policymakers. Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 7, 55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A. E. J., & Jickling, B. (2002). “Sustainability” in higher education from doublethink and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning. Higher Education Policy, 15, 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wapner, P., & Matthew, R. A. (2009). The humanity of global environmental ethics. The Journal of Environment and Development, 18, 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolhorton, S., & Bennell, D. (2007). Ecological literacy: Noongar way. Every Child, 13, 30–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socio-scientific issues in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science & Education, 89, 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zemplén, G. Á. (2007). Conflicting agendas: Critical thinking versus science education in the International Baccalaureate theory of knowledge course. Science & Education, 16, 167–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Primary and Preschool Education, University of Thessaly, Argonafton & Filellinon, 38221, Volos, Greece

    Tasos Hovardas

Authors
  1. Tasos Hovardas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tasos Hovardas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hovardas, T. A Critical Reading of Ecocentrism and Its Meta-Scientific Use of Ecology: Instrumental Versus Emancipatory Approaches in Environmental Education and Ecology Education. Sci & Educ 22, 1467–1483 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9493-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9493-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation