Advertisement

Environmentalist

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 127–132 | Cite as

Environmental in-service training: European issues and US comparisons

  • Daniel H. Henning
Article

Summary

This paper focuses on the emphasis placed on environmental considerations and values in the context of environmental in-service training programs for governmental personnel in England, Austria, the Federal Republic of Germany, and the Netherlands. The paper is generally based on field research conducted in Europe during August 1979; issues were identified and comparisons were made with training programs in the United States. The major issues considered include: (1) early versus later emphasis, (2) resistance, (3) specialists and techno-scientific emphasis, (4) technique orientations, (5) lack of environmental administrative training, and (6) innovations.

Despite various contrasts between European and United States environmental in-service training programs, there are some similarities. Many of these similarities center around a lack of emphasis on environmental training per se as well as on a lack of emphasis on environmental considerations and values because of various constraints, perceptions, and orientations. As developed nations with advanced governmental-technological systems in environmental affairs, their training programs are highly oriented toward these systems, and there is a lack of attention devoted to environmental aspects per se. The environmental titles and responsibilities do not automatically insure the incorporation of environmental considerations and values into the policy-making process with obvious training needs.

European governments may adhere to a more legalistic, formal, and structured approach with less discretion available. But specialist and administrative personnel, as in the United States, are intimately involved in value judgments and decision-making in environmental affairs. Because of this, training programs have a special responsibility to educate personnel about environmental considerations and values to insure that the environmental public interest is adequately presented in the decision-making process, i.e., that they develop environmental competencies as well as governmental and technological ones on an interface basis.

Keywords

United States Training Program Public Interest Federal Republic Special Responsibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Burke, Thomas (1980) Defending the Environment in Europe and America, Not Man Apart: p. 6.Google Scholar
  2. Digance, N. F. (1978) Exercise on the Environmental Protection Authority, unpublished manuscript, Civil Service College, London.Google Scholar
  3. Henning, Daniel H. (1977)Environmental Policy and Administration. Elsevier-North Holland, New York: pp. 53–6.Ibid., pp. 164 and 513–14.Google Scholar
  4. Henning, Daniel H. (1980) In-service training for environmental personnel: A critical analysis with innovations.J. Environmental Education.Google Scholar
  5. Pfiffner John M. & Prestus, Howard (1967)Public Administration. Ronald Press, New York: p. 127.Google Scholar
  6. Ritchie, Alton J. & Staub, John A. (1974) Training for Environmental Management: Selective Illustrations from an Emerging Field of Education, in Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Organization and Administration of Environmental Programs, United Nations, New York: pp. 161–64.Google Scholar
  7. Warner, W. L. (1963)The American Federal Executive. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.: p. 155.Google Scholar
  8. Wengert, Norman 1975 Land use planning and control in the German Federal Republic,Natural Resources Journal, 15, p. 514.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elsevier Sequoia S.A 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel H. Henning
    • 1
  1. 1.Eastern Montana CollegeBillingsUSA

Personalised recommendations