Abstract
Images in children’s books can leave a more lasting impression in young learners’ minds than text. Therefore, it is important for children’s books to use images as a teaching tool, especially regarding global issues such as environmental sustainability. This study examined how the images in nonfiction children’s books approach the topic of sustainability and whether these images support the overall goals of environmental education. We selected seven easy-to-access trade books which yielded 384 images for analysis. Two coders analyzed the images according to the following categories: (a) gender and age, (b) actions of people, (c) depictions of nature, (d) depictions of objects, (e) structures, and (f) habitation. Results show that nearly half of the images (48 %) depicted non-natural objects (16 %) or humans (31 %). One half of the images portrayed humans as consumers. Gender bias was evident, with 33 % of females portrayed as consumers and only 16 % of males portrayed as consumers. Similarly, 12 % of the images with males showed them engaged in recycling behavior, while only 4 % of the images showed females recycling. Of the 32 % of images depicting nature, individual plants rather than ecosystems were portrayed. Depictions of man-made systems predominated the images, a surprising finding. No images established the connection between consumerism and the depletion of natural resources or pollution, and further sustainable actions or lifestyles were not portrayed, implying that consumption is a societal norm. We conclude with recommendations for the use of images in children’s literature focusing on environmental education and sustainability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albers, P. (2014). Visual discourse analysis. In P. Albers, T. Holbrook, & A. Flint (Eds.), New methods on literacy research (pp. 85–98). New York, NY: Routledge.
Allan, J. D. (1975). The distributional ecology and diversity of benthic insects in cement creek, colorado. Ecology, 56, 1040–1053.
Avgerinou, M. D., & Pettersson, R. (2011). Towards a cohesive theory of visual literacy. Journal of Visual Literacy, 30(2), 1–19.
Begossi, A. (1996). Use of ecological methods in ethnobotany. Economic Botany, 50(3), 280–289.
Bekkedal, T. K. (1973). Content analysis of children’s books. Library Trends, 22(2), 112.
Berkowitz, A. R., Ford, M. E., & Brewer, C. A. (2005). A framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy, and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In E. A. Johnson & M. J. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 227–266). London: Cambridge University Press.
Blank, L., & Brewer, C. (2003). Ecology education when no child is left behind. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(7), 383–384.
Campbell, P. B., & Wirtenberg, J. (1980). How books influence children: What the research shows. Books for children bulletin, 11(6), 7–9.
Chan, K., Ng, Y., & Williams, R. (2012). Adolescent Girl’s interpretation of sexuality found in media images. Intercultural Communication Studies, 31(3), 63–81.
Cooper, D. J., Robinson, M. D., Slansky, J. A., & Kiger, N. D. (2014). Literacy: Helping students construct meaning. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.
Coyle, K. (2005). Environmental Literacy in America: What ten years of NEETF/Roper research and related studies say about environmental literacy in the U.S. The National Environmental Education and Training Foundation. Washington, D.C.: Washington.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Washington, D.C: Sage Publications.
de Boer, H., Lamxay, V., & Björk, L. (2012). Comparing medicinal plant knowledge using similarity indices: A case of the Brou, Saek and Kry in Lao PDR. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 141(1), 481–500.
Ellis, E. C., & Ramankutty, N. (2008). Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(8), 439–447.
EPA. (2014). Green Power defined. http://www3.epa.gov/greenpower/gpmarket/index.htm.
Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). What is sustainability? http://www.epa.gov/sustainability/basicinfo.htm.
Fagerstam, E. (2012). Children and young people’s experience of the natural world: Teachers’ perceptions and observations. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 28, 1–16.
Ganea, P. A., Pickard, M. B., & DeLoache, J. S. (2008). Transfer between picture books and the real world by very young children. Journal of Cognition and Development, 9(1), 46–66.
Hollidale, P. (1992). Ideology in the children’s book. In P. Hunt (Ed.), Literature for children (pp. 19–40). New York, NY: Routledge.
Jeffers, S. (1991). Brother eagle, sister sky. New York, NY: Dial books.
Kellert, S. R. (1996). The value of life: Biological diversity and human society. Washington, D. C.: Island Press.
Kemple, K. M., & Johnson, C. A. (2002). From the inside out: Nurturing aesthetic response to nature in the primary grades. Childhood Education, 78(4), 210–218.
Kirk, K. A., & Karbon, K. (1986). Environmental content in award winning children’s literature: 1960 through 1982. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(3), 1–7.
Larson, L., Green, T., & Castleberry, S. (2011). Construction and validation of an instrument to measure environmental orientations in a diverse group of children. Environment and Behavior, 43, 72–89.
Magurran, A. E. (1998). Ecological diversity and its measurement. New York, NY: Springer.
Maudlin, J. G., Sandlin, J. A., & Thaller, J. (2012). Baby culture and the curriculum of consumption: a critical reading of the film Babies. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(2), 211–229.
Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 273–294.
Moschovaki, E., & Meadows, S. (2005). Young children’s cognitive engagement during classroom book reading: Differences according to book, text genre, and story format. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 7(2). http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v7n2/moschovaki.html.
Orr, D. W. (2004). Earth in mind: On education, environment, and the human prospect. Washington: Island Press.
Preston, L. (2004). Making connections with nature: Bridging the theory-practice gap in outdoor and environmental education. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 8, 12–19.
Ramos, A. M., & Ramos, R. (2011). Ecoliteracy through imagery: A close reading of two wordless picture books. Children’s Literature in Education, 42, 325–339.
Rule, A., & Atkinson, J. (1994). Choosing picture books about Ecology. The Reading Teacher, 47, 586–591.
Russo, S. (2001). Promoting attitudes towards environmental education depends on early childhood education. Investigating, 17(4), 34–36.
Samant, S. S., Dhar, U., & Rawal, R. S. (2000). assessment of fuel resource diversity and utilization patterns in Askot Wildlife sanctuary in Kumaon Himalaya, India, for conservation and management. Environmental Conservation, 27(1), 5–13.
Saçkes, M., Trundle, K. C., & Flevares, L. M. (2009). Using children’s books to teach inquiry skills. YC Young Children, 64(6), 24.
Saldhana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Washington, DC: Sage Publications.
Sandell, K., & Öhman, J. (2010). Educational potentials of encounters with nature: Reflections from a Swedish outdoor perspective. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), 113–132.
Shapiro, J., & Williams, A. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66, 175–183.
Smardon, R. C. (2008). A comparison of Local Agenda 21 implementation in North American, European and Indian cities. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 19(1), 118–137.
Sustainable Development Goals. (nd). https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics.
Tare, M., Chiong, C., Ganea, P., & DeLoache, J. (2010). Less is more: How manipulative features affect children’s learning from picture books. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 395–400.
UNCED. (1992). Earth summit: UN conference on environment and development. http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html.
UNESCO. (1997). Educating for a sustainable future: A transdisciplinary vision for concerted action. http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod01t05s01.html.
UNESCO. (1998). Towards an Agenda 21 for higher education. http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/principal/ag-21-e.html.
Williams, J. A, Jr, Podeschi, C., Palmer, N., Schwadel, P., & Meyler, D. (2012). The human-environment dialog in award-winning children’s picture books. Sociological Inquiry, 82, 145–159.
Wilson, R. (2012). Nature and young children: encouraging creative play and learning in natural environments (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wilson, R. A. (1994). Environmental education at the early childhood level. North American Association for Environmental Education, PO Box 400, Troy, OH 45373.
Xiao, C., & McCright, A. M. (2015). Gender differences in environmental concern: Revisiting the institutional trust hypothesis in usa. Environment and Behavior, 47(1), 17–37.
Nonfiction children’s book cited
Einspruch, A. (2011). Using energy to get around. Minneapolis, MN: Smart Apple Media.
Green, J. (2013). A teen guide to eco-gardening, food, and cooking. Chicago, IL: Heinemann.
Kirk, E. (2011). Human footprint. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Kids.
Lanz, H. (2012). Shopping choices. Mankato, MN: Sea-toSea.
Nagle, J. (2009). Reducing your carbon footprint at school. New York, NY: Rosen Central.
Rodger, E. (2008). Building a green community. New York, NY: Crabtree Publishing Company.
Strum, J. (2001). Filling the earth with trash. Vero Beach, FL: Rourke Publishing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
-
1.
Cover page (coded for contents listed below)
-
2.
Gender (human male or female; adult or child)
-
3.
Actions of people
Consuming: When people are depicted buying, picking (in a commercial setting), choosing (in a commercial setting), eating, shopping.
Producing/creating: When people are depicted farming, gardening, planting, painting, drawing, working in scientific laboratories, working category
Recycling: When people are depicted recycling the things they have consumed, near recycling stations.
Other: When people are depicted actions that do not fall under either of the categories listed above.
-
4.
Depiction of nature
Forests, grasslands, natural ecosystems: images showing nature ecosystems or habitats.
Farmland, monoculture fields, and plantations: the images showed farmland (crops and trees), fields with one type of crops; coffee, tea, cotton, or other plantation crops.
Golf course/maintained areas: such as lawns with predominant grass for greenery.
Gardens/small or big spaces: includes container gardens.
Green house/artificial: environments that support growth of plants in controlled conditions such as green house, hot house, etc.,
Modified environment: modification of natural habitat depicted with homes or other human signature.
Compost: actions depicting composting behavior or when the photograph has caption marked compost.
Plant (seedling): a single plant or seedling.
Water: depiction of natural water bodies such as ocean, lakes, and rivers.
Animal: any non-vertebrate and vertebrate creature depicted in the picture.
-
5.
Depictions of objects
Only objects/actions of focus were included in the coding.
Alternate energy (includes solar energy): wind, solar, walking.
Art work: handicrafts, paintings.
Fruits/vegetables/whole food: cut or whole foods that are displayed in the pictures.
Machine (includes electronics): a mechanical working device that assists humans in completing a job.
Metal objects: cups, nuts, bolts, spanner, toys, bulbs.
Money: currency notes or coins.
Paper goods: paper towels, plates, and other utility items made of paper.
Plastic goods: forks, spoons, baskets.
Processed food: cooked food such as pizza, sandwich, and burger.
Recycle station: containers, bins, or other vessels marked for recycle.
Rubber: tires, and other items using rubber are depicted here.
Service vehicle: trash truck, ambulance, school bus.
Textile: clothing displayed (not on personnel), bags, towels.
Transportation: bus, car, train, ferry, and other ways to land transport in urban areas.
Trash: depictions of garbage, trash cans, litter.
Wooden objects: barrel, spatula, crates, spool.
-
6.
Depictions of structure
Urban: homes, neighborhoods, garden.
Suburban: homes with lawn, field, less urban, some nature (such as lawn).
Industrial: factory, warehouse.
Agricultural: fields, farms, animals in husbandry.
Pollution: exhaust, smog, water pollution.
-
7.
Depictions of habitation/habitat
Architectural model: instead of real structure a miniature architectural model is displayed.
Community center: non-school setting with adults and children, space used for various activities.
Homes: single dwelling homes or apartment blocks.
Infrastructure: bridges, dams, roads, etc.
Malls: multiple shops in a large area.
School: classroom setting, school buildings.
Shops: single commercial location with shoppers or goods on display.
Sky scrapers: large, multistoried building.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Muthukrishnan, R., Kelley, J.E. Depictions of sustainability in children’s books. Environ Dev Sustain 19, 955–970 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-016-9778-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-016-9778-7