Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:56:35.592Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Innovate for Impact: Young Adults Education and Empowerment for Climate Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2024

Shelley Rap*
Affiliation:
Department of Science Teaching, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Moran Bodas*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency & Disaster Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv-Yafo, Israel
*
Corresponding authors: Shelley Rap; Email: [email protected] and Moran Bodas; Email: [email protected]
Corresponding authors: Shelley Rap; Email: [email protected] and Moran Bodas; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Anthropogenic climate change is a significant driver of disasters, such as tropical storms, floods, drought and loss of biodiversity, amplifying their frequency and severity worldwide. The annual incidence of extreme weather-related events increases with growing human exposure to risks. The Sendai Framework and its associated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) recognise the interlinkages between disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and sustainable development. However, despite the best intentions of disaster planners, the current efforts are suboptimal in promoting implementation. Education is a critical goal to achieve sustainable development. Environmental Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) seeks to equip students with the knowledge, skills, values and agency necessary to address the complex challenges of climate change and global warming. One example of such an educational programme is the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme. This interdisciplinary ESD programme educates 9th graders in SDG-related scientific content through scientific data analysis. It strives to inspire students to develop their agency and become responsible future citizens by taking local climate action to bring about sustainable development in their communities. Empowered young people who become agents that bring about global changes are crucial in the context of the climate crisis. However, such efforts should be undertaken cautiously to avoid doing more harm than good by evoking climate anxiety. These implications are discussed.

Type
Communication
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Australian Association for Environmental Education

Climate change and its impact on disaster trends

Anthropogenic climate change has become a significant driver of disasters, amplifying their frequency and severity worldwide. Warming the Earth’s atmosphere due to excessive greenhouse gas emissions has led to a cascade of adverse effects on our planet’s natural cycles and systems. Rising global temperatures contribute to the intensification of weather events, such as extreme storms, floods, heat waves, droughts and wildfires. These events, in turn, result in devastating consequences for both human and natural systems (Mechler & Bouwer, Reference Mechler and Bouwer2015; Van Aalst, Reference Van Aalst2006).

Between 2002 and 2021, an average of 370 disasters of natural causes were documented by the International Disaster Database (EM-DAT), leading to an average annual death toll of 60,955 people globally. These disasters affect an average of 198.9 million people yearly, primarily (91%) by weather-related events, such as drought, floods and storms. Moreover, they cause an annual average loss of US$ 187.7 billion (CRED, 2023). In 2022, heatwaves alone claimed over 16,000 human lives in Europe, whereas droughts affected a staggering 88.9 million people in Africa. Singlehandedly, Hurricane Ian caused catastrophic damage amounting to US$ 100 billion in the Americas. These figures underscore the immense toll that disasters of natural causes, exacerbated by climate change, have on human lives and economies worldwide (CRED, 2023).

Recent studies suggest that the yearly incidence of extreme weather-related events increases, causing a growing human exposure to these risks (Keim, Reference Keim2020). Significant heatwaves and floods are noted, coupled with increased deaths associated with these disaster types (CRED, 2023; Franzke & Torelló i Sentelles, Reference Franzke and Torelló i Sentelles2020). These trends suggest that the climate change crisis is expected to worsen and pose an even graver challenge to humankind and nature in the near future (Tong et al., Reference Tong, Bambrick, Beggs, Chen, Hu, Ma, Steffen and Tan2022). Moreover, anthropogenic climate change causes wide-scale destruction of the environment through degradation, defaunation and fragmentation of ecosystems and their components, leading to biodiversity losses and disruption of nature on a wide scale (Malhi et al., Reference Malhi, Franklin, Seddon, Solan, Turner, Field and Knowlton2020).

The Sendai Framework and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The Sendai Framework 2030 is a global initiative that focuses on disaster risk reduction in the context of climate change. Its primary purpose is to ensure the resilience of communities and nations in the face of increasing natural hazards and their impacts. This framework recognises that climate change exacerbates the frequency and intensity of disasters, posing significant challenges to sustainable development. The Sendai Framework aims to create a safer and more resilient future by integrating disaster risk reduction into development policies and practices. (Aitsi-Selmi, Egawa, Sasaki, Wannous & Murray Reference Aitsi-Selmi, Egawa, Sasaki, Wannous and Murray2015; Kelman, Reference Kelman2015; UNDRR, 2023)

The goals of the Sendai Framework 2030 are centred around seven global targets to be achieved over the next decade. These targets focus on reducing mortality, the number of affected people, economic losses, damage to critical infrastructure and disruptions to essential services. The framework also aims to enhance international cooperation, strengthen disaster risk governance and improve the availability and accessibility of disaster risk information. By pursuing these goals, those involved with the Sendai Framework strive to build resilient communities and nations that can withstand the impacts of climate change-related disasters and achieve sustainable development in the face of adversity (Aitsi-Selmi et al., Reference Aitsi-Selmi, Egawa, Sasaki, Wannous and Murray2015; Kelman, Reference Kelman2015; UNDRR, 2023).

The Sendai Framework 2030 aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the members of the United Nations. Although not infallible, the SDGs aim to secure a prosperous future for upcoming generations, with a primary focus on eliminating poverty, preserving the planet and ensuring inclusivity. They encompass a wide range of societal requirements, including education, health care, social security and employment prospects, as well as tackling global warming and safeguarding the environment. By addressing these pressing issues, the aim of these goals is to create a world that is sustainable, equitable and conducive to a better quality of life for all (UNDESA, 2023b).

The Sendai Framework and the SDGs recognise the interlinkages between disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and sustainable development. By integrating these goals, the framework seeks to promote sustainable development practices that reduce vulnerabilities and enhance resilience. This includes eradicating poverty, promoting inclusive and sustainable economic growth, ensuring access to quality education and health care and fostering resilient infrastructure and sustainable cities (UNDESA, 2023b; UNDRR, 2023) .

However, several studies suggest that despite the best intentions, the current efforts are suboptimal in promoting sufficient SDG implementation (Leal Filho et al., Reference Leal Filho, Wolf, Lange Salvia, Beynaghi, Shulla, Kovaleva and Vasconcelos2020; Moyer & Hedden, Reference Moyer and Hedden2020; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Yin, Hua, Meadows, Li, Liu, Cherubini, Pereira and Fu2022). Projections even estimate that by 2030, one in every four young people will reside in one of the 28 most vulnerable countries for climate change-related risks, none of which is expected to achieve any of the SDG targets (Moyer & Hedden, Reference Moyer and Hedden2020).

Challenges in promoting sustainable development

For over two decades, arguments voiced in the media and scientific outlets claim that human psychology is not designed to solve the global climate change crisis. Humans are said to dismiss events that are remote in time and space, as well as resort to denial, exert excessive optimism or resort to excessive faith (e.g. fatalism) or technological fixes that someone else will figure out (Atkinson & Jacquet, Reference Atkinson and Jacquet2022).

We suggest an option whereby a complex psychosocial framework should be considered. When dealing with the adversities of climate change-related emergencies and disasters, specifically death and injury, one should consider that rationality, realism, reasonable decision-making and voluntary, conscious control are negatively affected (Akil, Robert-Demontrond & Bouillé Reference Akil, Robert-Demontrond and Bouillé2018; Wolfe & Tubi, Reference Wolfe and Tubi2019). In other words, there is not simply an information deficit that could be overcome by raising awareness, but rather an emotional response pushing back on such an attempt to raise awareness (Suldovsky, Reference Suldovsky2017; Wolfe & Tubi, Reference Wolfe and Tubi2019). Consequently, mainstream approaches to promoting behavioural change are inapt in motivating and maintaining a sustainable change in human behaviour (Abunyewah et al., Reference Abunyewah, Gajendran and Maund2018; Becker et al., Reference Becker, Paton, Johnston and Ronan2013; Levac et al., Reference Levac, Toal-Sullivan and O’Sullivan2012; Lim, Reference Lim2022; Olympia et al., Reference Olympia, Rivera, Heverley, Anyanwu and Gregorits2010; Paton, Reference Paton2019).

Most attempts at engaging the public in climate change risk reduction behaviour follow similar paths, predominantly through risk communication. This approach follows the information deficit model (Abunyewah et al., Reference Abunyewah, Gajendran, Maund and Okyere2020; Suldovsky, Reference Suldovsky2017), which assumes that the public lacks sufficient information and that increasing awareness of risks and elevating threat perception can generate the motivation needed for preparedness behaviour (Glik, Reference Glik2007; Paton, Reference Paton2019). Although true in some cases, raising awareness is usually insufficient in changing behaviour in such contexts, even if behavioural intent exists (Maidl & Buchecker, Reference Maidl and Buchecker2015).

Moreover, many risk communication efforts use fear tactics as the primary approach to foster behavioural change, despite the evidence suggesting that this approach does more harm than good (Ruiter et al., Reference Ruiter, Kessels, Peters and Kok2014) and may even lead to climate anxiety, that is, psychological response characterised by feelings of worry, fear, distress and sometimes frustration, guilt and grief about the current and future impacts of climate change (Hickman et al., Reference Hickman, Marks, Pihkala, Clayton, Lewandowski, Mayall, Wray, Mellor and van Susteren2021; Verlie, Reference Verlie2019). Arguably, this phenomenon can be linked to fear of death, which may become apparent in one’s consciousness once triggered by a discussion of the gloomy prospects of climate change, as proposed by Terror Management Theory (Pyszczynski et al., Reference Pyszczynski, Solomon and Greenberg2015; Wolfe & Tubi, Reference Wolfe and Tubi2019). In fact, Wolfe and Tubi argue that mortality awareness may be the missing link in climate response studies. The authors claim that exposure to stimuli that highlight climate change’s potentially life-threatening effects may exacerbate counter-productive behaviours (Smith et al., Reference Smith, Ross, Shouldice and Wolfe2022; Stollberg & Jonas, Reference Stollberg and Jonas2021; Wolfe & Tubi, Reference Wolfe and Tubi2019). For example, Akil et al. suggest that anxiogenic risk communication can lead to more pro-materialistic, instead of pro-environmental consumer choices (Akil et al., Reference Akil, Robert-Demontrond and Bouillé2018).

Climate change risk communication and education can effectively bring about sustainable behavioural change; however, this requires innovative socio-ecological approaches to engage populations in anticipatory and preventive action (Odiyo & Volenzo, Reference Odiyo and Volenzo2019). Recent studies show that such alternative approaches that do not involve fear tactics, in particular concerning climate change, are available. These approaches include the use of optimism and positively framed emotional messages (Peters et al. Reference Peters, Boyd, Cameron, Contractor, Diefenbach, Fleszar-Pavlovic, Markowitz, Salas and Stephens2022), empowerment of individuals and communities to assume a more substantial role in shaping their fate and future (Börner, Reference Börner2023; Brooks et al., Reference Brooks, Sury, Cruz, Petkova and Schlegelmilch2017; Casas et al., Reference Casas, Pormon, Manus and Lejano2021; Lejano et al., Reference Lejano, Rahman, Kabir and Urrutia2022) and re-shaping behaviour through socio-normative messaging (Lim et al., Reference Lim, Liu and Atwell Seate2022; Lim, Reference Lim2022; Peters et al., Reference Peters, Boyd, Cameron, Contractor, Diefenbach, Fleszar-Pavlovic, Markowitz, Salas and Stephens2022).

Environmental education and education for sustainable development

Education is a critical tool in achieving sustainable development (Piao & Managi, Reference Piao and Managi2023). Taking its shape in the 1970s, Environmental Education focuses on the natural environment, environmental problems and conservation (Reis & Roth, Reference Reis and Roth2007). It is designed to provide effective development of deep environmental awareness and practical tools to address specific environmental issues (Gough, Reference Gough2013). Similarly, climate (change) education is the teaching of the science, impacts and solutions related to climate change, which provides learners with a critical awareness of global environmental challenges caused by climate change and their impact on all components of the environment. Environmental and climate education are teaching efforts that promote public awareness, knowledge and understanding of the environment, its functions and the human impact. These were coined by Roth in 1992 as “environmental literacy,” that is, the ability to effectively diagnose the state of the environment and apply appropriate measures to preserve it (Roth, Reference Roth1992). It also aims to foster positive attitudes, values and motivation to protect and improve the environment for the benefit of human and non-human species (Monroe et al., Reference Monroe, Andrews and Biedenweg2008).

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is a more holistic, system-level approach that examines the interconnections between environmental, social and economic aspects of sustainability. Its breadth can sometimes be considered a disadvantage, as it may dilute the emphasis on environmental protection. It can further be criticised for not employing enough ‘more-than-human’ kin in teaching environmental issues, as these programmes tend to focus more on human-related sustainability issues. Nevertheless, applied appropriately, ESD can be an approach to infuse sustainability and environmental literacy into established environmental education in a way that seeks to equip students with the requisite knowledge, skills and values to address the complex challenges of our time, namely, climate change. It aims to foster a deep understanding of sustainability principles, environmental stewardship, social equity and economic viability (Perwitasari et al., Reference Perwitasari, Hariyono and Susantini2023). ESD allows students to make informed decisions and act in a way that conserves the environment while maintaining economic benefit for all and a just society for current and future generations (Blonder & Rosenfeld, Reference Blonder and Rosenfeld2019; Ferguson et al., Reference Ferguson, Roofe, Cook, Bramwell-Lalor and Gentles2022).

ESD is particularly crucial for educating students as future scientists and responsible citizens (Holfelder, Reference Holfelder2019; Taimur & Sattar, Reference Taimur and Sattar2020). Moreover, ESD is vital for fostering collaboration (Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown & Hopkins Reference Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown and Hopkins2016). Sustainability challenges require collective efforts and interdisciplinary approaches. ESD encourages students to collaborate with their peers, promoting teamwork and cooperation. By working together, students can pool their knowledge and perspectives, leading to innovative solutions that consider sustainability’s social, economic and environmental dimensions (Laurie et al., Reference Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown and Hopkins2016; Taimur & Sattar, Reference Taimur and Sattar2020). Through group projects, discussions and experiential learning activities, students develop communication and interpersonal skills essential for effective collaboration in the real world (Agbedahin, Reference Agbedahin2019; Kioupi & Voulvoulis, Reference Kioupi and Voulvoulis2019; Laurie et al., Reference Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown and Hopkins2016).

ESD goes beyond traditional academic subjects and encourages students to become active participants in shaping a more sustainable future. According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), it helps them recognise the consequences of individual and collective actions on the planet and society. Furthermore, students can develop empathy, cultural sensitivity and a sense of responsibility by learning about global challenges such as poverty, inequality and environmental degradation (UNESCO, 2015). They become equipped to make informed choices and take action to create a more sustainable and equitable world. Moreover, students are empowered to become change agents and contribute to developing sustainable technologies and practices (Agbedahin, Reference Agbedahin2019; Kioupi & Voulvoulis, Reference Kioupi and Voulvoulis2019; Laurie et al., Reference Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown and Hopkins2016)

Taken together, there are several key elements that emerge as critical when designing an ESD programme. These include a holistic approach that integrates the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainability without compromising the environmental literacy gains. In addition, an effective ESD programme should offer a collaborative learning experience and active participation in order to foster agency and empower students to take local action and bring about sustainable change.

The “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme as an example of ESD

One example of such an educational programme is the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme developed by the Department of Science Teaching of the Weizmann Institute, Rehovot, Israel. Unlike some other ESD programmes that may not focus enough on data literacy (Letouzé, Reference Letouzé2016), this programme addresses global issues based on a dialogue between mathematical and science-based data. In this way, it introduces 9th graders to some of the SDGs that the world faces.

“Speak to Me in Numbers” is an interdisciplinary ESD programme that teaches SDG-related scientific content through an evidence-based approach to data analysis (Rap et al., Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022). Each module focuses on a different SDG challenge, presenting students with related authentic data (in various mathematical representations) and scientific backgrounds. The SDGs chosen for the different units were carefully selected to align well with a ninth-grade curriculum. The programme’s curriculum was structured to emphasise objectives that are most relevant to the students’ lives and can be effectively woven into the science syllabus, such as those related to the carbon cycle, acid-base solutions and alternative energy sources. For example, the programme includes modules about SDG3, dealing with good health and well-being, SDG6 dealing with clean water and sanitation, SDG7 dealing with affordable and clean energy, SDG13 dealing with climate action and SDG14 dealing with life below water (UNDESA, 2023a).

The units in the “Speak to Me in Numbers” curriculum are based on several design features, including data-based challenges requiring mathematical literacy to address them and students’ construction of evidence-based scientific arguments. After an introduction to the relevant SDG, students are presented with relevant graphs, charts and data tables that relate to a specific issue or challenge. Students are then tasked with performing mathematical computations of the data, reaching data-based conclusions and articulating their data-driven arguments. At the conclusion of every unit, students are presented with an opportunity to plan and execute an activism activity. This activity is designed to be data-driven, urging students to formulate an action plan based on the data available to address a certain SDG challenge. Typically, these activities are situated within the students’ local environment, fostering an authentic sense of relevance and connection. They encourage students to address specific sustainability issues while improving their scientific and mathematical abilities. They learn to articulate their ideas effectively, construct compelling scientific arguments, cultivate an awareness of the need for change in their immediate surroundings and become agents of change in their local environment (Rap et al., Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022).

For example, the unit discussing SDG14 (“Life below Water”) relates to the negative consequences of human activities on the Earth’s oceans. At the start of the unit, students are asked if they perceive this issue to be of any concern to them, given that most of them do not reside near the ocean. Students are then presented with data concerning carbon dioxide emissions, ocean acidification and its effect on marine life, the concept of overfishing, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (i.e. a collection of plastic debris in the Pacific Ocean) and macro and micro-plastics and their impact on marine life and food chains. Students are asked to contemplate the consequences of micro-plastics in the oceans and how that phenomenon relates to them. Lastly, students are engaged in activism efforts pertaining to plastic packaging and propose recommendations on how to change packaging to reduce the amount of plastic used. (Rap et al., Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022)

Similar curricula and pedagogical programmes to the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme were developed to equip and empower future citizens to address and tackle global challenges, all while utilising cognitive skills and scientific knowledge (Rap et al., Reference Rap, Geller, Katchevich, Gbarin and Blonder2023). Such initiatives are promising to unleash the potential of ESD to promote sustainable change in people’s lives.

Nevertheless, the development of such pedagogies should be mindful of the adverse consequences of students’ exposure to unsettling content. Prior studies have shown that climate change teaching to students can unleash overwhelming emotions of frustration, grief and guilt among students (Verlie, Reference Verlie2019). Therefore, emphasis was placed on ensuring that the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme supports students’ engagement in climate change action without triggering such climate anxiety. For example, some of the topics addressed in the programme were very relevant to the students’ daily lives, including the issues of wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the rising sea levels. In these topics, we carefully considered how to phrase the wording of the questions so as not to instil fear among students living in coastal areas who might be anxious about their homes’ fate or students who are anxious about contracting the virus. For instance, concerning the rise of sea levels, an emphasis was made concerning the time frames for sea level rise, that is, not immediate. For the pandemic content, reduction of content-related anxiety was achieved via an emphasis on the efficacy of individual behaviour (e.g. mask-wearing, personal hygiene, physical distancing) in reducing the risk of illness, as well as a focus on treating information with caution given the multitude of misinformation. In addition, instead of focusing on the looming aspects of failed action, the programme encourages students’ activism, calling for achievable local changes that will accumulate into global changes by harnessing more people to join such initiatives. Moreover, the programme is taught by teachers who undertook a professional development that ensured not only their capacity to effectively utilise the programme’s contents, but also to address any concerns raised by the students regarding the programme’s curriculum.

Young people empowerment and activism

Traditionally, young people have primarily been depicted in a limited manner as a group highly vulnerable to adverse effects during disasters. However, there is now a growing acknowledgement of the potential of young people as change agents in their communities and as active participants in shaping disaster risk reduction policies and practices (Cox et al., Reference Cox, Scannell, Heykoop, Tobin-Gurley and Peek2017). One example is the School Strike for Climate movement, which is a global movement led by young people to put moral pressure on policymakers and limit global warming (Verlie & Flynn, Reference Verlie and Flynn2022).

Empowering young people to take local action that can bring about global change is crucial in the context of climate change (Ralls et al., Reference Ralls, Lahana, Towers and Johnson2022). Young people have a significant stake in the future and are often at the forefront of raising awareness about environmental issues. By providing them with the knowledge, tools and opportunities to take action at the local level, their creativity, passion and potential to create meaningful change on a global scale can be sparked (Bandura & Cherry, Reference Bandura and Cherry2020; Bentz & O’Brien, Reference Bentz and O’Brien2019).

This notion is supported by previous work looking into young people empowerment in the context of disaster risk reduction (Pfefferbaum et al., Reference Pfefferbaum, Pfefferbaum and Van Horn2018). For example, Haynes and Tanner demonstrated the benefits of participatory videos led by young people in the Philippines in raising awareness of climate change-related disaster risk and advocating for the need for disaster risk reduction in their communities (Haynes & Tanner, Reference Haynes and Tanner2015). Similarly, Cox et al. reported that Canadian young people are both ready and capable of playing an integral role in climate change-related disaster risk reduction (Cox et al., Reference Cox, Hill, Plush, Heykoop and Tremblay2019). Similar findings were reported by Vogel et al. (Reference Vogel, Nkrumah, Kosciulek, Lebea, Booth and Brown2022) for South African students (Vogel et al., Reference Vogel, Nkrumah, Kosciulek, Lebea, Booth and Brown2022). Moreover, educational initiatives that empower young people were also beneficial in other contexts, such as earthquake preparedness (Bodas et al., Reference Bodas, Peleg, Shenhar and Adini2019).

The “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme strives to do exactly that – empower young people to take action to bring about local changes in their communities. As part of the programme, students were asked to consider how changes in their behaviour could impact the environment. For example, students thought about their carbon footprint and how more mindful usage in various areas (such as transportation, electricity and nutrition) could reduce their carbon footprint and have a longer-term positive impact on the environment. Sometimes this activity resulted in an increased sense of agency among students and even led to actual agency, as opposed to only sense of agency, through the creation of more extensive activism. In this regard, student agency relates to the “development of an identity and a sense of belonging. When students develop agency, they rely on motivation, hope, self-efficacy and a growth mindset (the understanding that abilities and intelligence can be developed) to navigate towards well-being” (OECD, 2019). Moreover, student agency refers to the quality of students’ self-reflective and intentional action and interaction with their environment. It encompasses variable notions of agentic possibility (“power”) and agentic orientation (“will”) (Klemenčič, Reference Klemenčič2015). According to Klemenčič, studentship is highly conducive to engagement. In other words, students are likely to become change agents, as they seek to exert some influence on their lives and surroundings. Moreover, student agency can translate into behavioural change (Klemenčič, Reference Klemenčič2015).

The programme fosters students’ agency to perform the task of becoming a change agent. For example, various groups of students decided to engage in activism at both the school and community levels. For instance, students taught their peers at school about the climate change challenges and ways to address them while using data they had acquired in our programme. In this way, they persuaded other students to act and contribute to the local changes. Examples of such activities included replacing school light bulbs with more energy-efficient ones, advocating for the upgrading of air conditioning units at the school to consume less electricity, reducing the use of plastic bottles and transitioning to reusable ones, changing transportation habits to school and more. The development of students’ agency through activism practice is supported by other research (Littrell et al., Reference Littrell, Tayne, Okochi, Leckey, Gold and Lynds2020).

Rap et al. (Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022) proposed a model according to which there is a mutual and dynamic relationship between developing SDG knowledge, developing data-based argumentation skills and fostering students’ activism. See Figure 1. These processes form an interconnected triangle within the model, with each element mutually benefiting and reinforcing the others. Moreover, each process plays a role in nurturing student agency regarding sustainability matters (located at the apex of the model’s outer triangle) (Rap et al., Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022). Combined, these elements support the formation and development of environmental citizenship, that is, the responsible pro-environmental behaviour of citizens who act and participate in society as agents of change, both individually and collectively, at the local, national and global levels (Hadjichambis & Reis, Reference Hadjichambis and Reis2020). Within the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme, for example, these interconnected facets are demonstrated through the linkage between the data students are presented with concerning certain SDGs, the assignment they perform in developing scientific and mathematical arguments surrounding these data and the support of agency development to follow through with local activism. Ultimately, this programme develops their aptitude towards environmental citizenship.

Figure 1. A schematic representation of the interlinks between Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) knowledge, data-based argumentation skills and students’ activism (based on Rap et al., Reference Rap, Blonder, Sindiani-Bsoul and Rosenfeld2022).

Conclusions

There is a growing need for ESD since it equips students with the knowledge, skills and values necessary to tackle the complex challenges of our time. The “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme demonstrates the potential of such ESD initiatives in fostering agency among students and promoting change through activism. By empowering students to become agents of change, these programmes have the potential to bring about significant positive impacts on local and global scales. Nevertheless, although teaching students about the severity of environmental issues is essential, an overwhelming emphasis on doom and gloom may inadvertently create anxiety or a sense of powerlessness. Therefore, a balanced approach that combines awareness with hope, empowerment and practical solutions should be adopted to ensure that ESD initiatives positively impact students’ well-being and motivation to act (Kelsey & Armstrong, Reference Kelsey and Armstrong2012; Kelsey, Reference Kelsey2016; Kerret et al., Reference Kerret, Orkibi, Bukchin and Ronen2020). This is achieved in the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme, for example, by careful wording of pedagogical content, focusing on tangible, real-world data evidence and fostering students’ agency to act upon newly established knowledge to bring about a sustainable change in their world.

Future research could explore the long-term effects of ESD programmes that foster students’ agency and environmental citizenship, such as the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme, on students’ attitudes, behaviours and engagement with sustainability issues. Investigating the efficacy of different teaching methodologies, the role of cultural contexts and the impact of collaborative learning approaches would provide valuable insights into optimising the effectiveness of such ESD initiatives. Additionally, studying the factors contributing to the successful implementation and scaling up of such ESD programmes can aid in developing guidelines and formulating the best practices for educators and policymakers.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the development team of the “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme: Ron Blonder, Moran Bodas, Alex Friedlander, Sharon Geller, Shoshana Interact, Pazit Nagar, Ayelet Odani, Ira Raiman, Shelley Rap, Sherman Rosenfeld and Ayshi Sindiani-Bsoul. The “Speak to Me in Numbers” programme was funded by the Trump Foundation, Grant 361.

Financial support

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Ethical standard

Nothing to note.

Author biographies

Shelley Rap is a researcher in the Chemistry Group of the Department of Science Teaching at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel. The group, headed by Prof. Ron Blonder, leads research and professional development frameworks for chemistry teachers and develops theoretical models, investigates and conducts a wide range of teachers’ professional development activities and integrates state-of-the-art technologies into chemistry teaching. Dr Rap’s research aims at exploring innovative methods to enhance chemistry education and integrate technology into teaching practices, with a primary focus on supporting students to become future responsible citizens involved in tackling global challenges, including climate change.

Moran Bodas is a senior lecturer at the Department of Emergency and Disaster Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University. Dr Bodas holds a B.Sc. in Life Sciences, a Master’s in Public Health with an emphasis in emergency and disaster management and a Ph.D. in Disaster Management, all from Tel-Aviv University. Dr Bodas successfully completed a post-doctoral fellowship at the Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine in Novara, Italy. Dr Bodas is the former director of the Israel National Center for Trauma and Emergency Medicine Research, Gertner Institute of Epidemiology in Israel.

References

Abunyewah, M., Gajendran, T., & Maund, K. (2018). Conceptual framework for motivating actions towards disaster preparedness through risk communication. Procedia Engineering, 212, 246253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abunyewah, M., Gajendran, T., Maund, K., & Okyere, S.A. (2020). Strengthening the information deficit model for disaster preparedness: Mediating and moderating effects of community participation. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 46, 101492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agbedahin, A.V. (2019). Sustainable development, Education for Sustainable Development, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Emergence, efficacy, eminence, and future. Sustainable Development, 27(4), 669680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitsi-Selmi, A., Egawa, S., Sasaki, H., Wannous, C., & Murray, V. (2015). The Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction: Renewing the global commitment to people’s resilience, health, and well-being. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(2), 164176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akil, H., Robert-Demontrond, P., & Bouillé, J. (2018). Exploitation of mortality salience in communication on climate change. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), 33(1), 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, Q.D., & Jacquet, J. (2022). Challenging the idea that humans are not designed to solve climate change. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(3), 619630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A., & Cherry, L. (2020). Enlisting the power of youth for climate change. American Psychologist, 75(7), 945951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, J.S., Paton, D., Johnston, D.M., & Ronan, K.R. (2013). Salient beliefs about earthquake hazards and household preparedness. Risk Analysis, 33(9), 17101727. DOI: 10.1111/risa.12014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bentz, J., & O’Brien, K. (2019). ART FOR CHANGE: Transformative learning and youth empowerment in a changing climate. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene, 7, 52.Google Scholar
Blonder, R., & Rosenfeld, S. (2019). Integrating the human element in the responsible research and innovation framework into systems thinking approaches for teachers’ professional development. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(12), 27002703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodas, M., Peleg, K., Shenhar, G., & Adini, B. (2019). Light search and rescue training of high school students in Israel-longitudinal study of effect on resilience and self-efficacy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 36, 101089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Börner, S. (2023). Emotions matter: EMPOWER-ing youth by integrating emotions of (chronic) disaster risk into strategies for disaster preparedness. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 89, 103636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, J., Sury, J., Cruz, M., Petkova, E., & Schlegelmilch, J. (2017). Fear of disasters and climate change: One and the same? In APHA. 2017 Annual Meeting & Expo (Nov. 4-Nov. 8).Google Scholar
Casas, E.V., Pormon, M.M., Manus, J., & Lejano, R. (2021). Relationality and resilience: Environmental education in a time of pandemic and climate crisis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 52(5), 314324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, R.S., Hill, T.T., Plush, T., Heykoop, C., & Tremblay, C. (2019). More than a checkbox: Engaging youth in disaster risk reduction and resilience in Canada. Natural Hazards, 98(1), 213227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, R.S., Scannell, L., Heykoop, C., Tobin-Gurley, J., & Peek, L. (2017). Understanding youth disaster recovery: The vital role of people, places, and activities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 22, 249256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, T., Roofe, C., Cook, L.D., Bramwell-Lalor, S., & Gentles, C.H. (2022). Education for sustainable development (ESD) infusion into curricula: Influences on students’ understandings of sustainable development and ESD. Brock Education Journal, 31(2), 6384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franzke, C.L., & Torelló i Sentelles, H. (2020). Risk of extreme high fatalities due to weather and climate hazards and its connection to large-scale climate variability. Climatic Change, 162(2), 507525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glik, D.C. (2007). Risk communication for public health emergencies. Annual Review of Public Health, 28(1), 3354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gough, A. (2013). The emergence of environmental education research: A “history” of the field. In International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 1322). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadjichambis, A.C., & Reis, P. (2020). Introduction to the conceptualisation of environmental citizenship for twenty-first-century education. In Conceptualizing environmental citizenship for 21st century education, 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, K., & Tanner, T.M. (2015). Empowering young people and strengthening resilience: Youth-centred participatory video as a tool for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Children’s Geographies, 13(3), 357371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickman, C., Marks, E., Pihkala, P., Clayton, S., Lewandowski, R.E., Mayall, E.E., Wray, B., Mellor, C., van Susteren, L. (2021). Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: A global survey. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(12), e863e873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holfelder, A.-K. (2019). Towards a sustainable future with education? Sustainability Science, 14(4), 943952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keim, M.E. (2020). The epidemiology of extreme weather event disasters (1969-2018). Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 35(3), 267271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelman, I. (2015). Climate change and the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(2), 117127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelsey, E. (2016). Propagating collective hope in the midst of environmental doom and gloom. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE), 21, 2340.Google Scholar
Kelsey, E., & Armstrong, C. (2012). Finding hope in a world of environmental catastrophe. In Learning for sustainability in times of accelerating change (pp. 187200).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerret, D., Orkibi, H., Bukchin, S., & Ronen, T. (2020). Two for one: Achieving both pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being by implementing environmental-hope-enhancing programs in schools. The Journal of Environmental Education, 51(6), 434448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kioupi, V., & Voulvoulis, N. (2019). Education for sustainable development: A systemic framework for connecting the SDGs to educational outcomes. Sustainability, 11(21), 6104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klemenčič, M. (2015). What is student agency? An ontological exploration in the context of research on student engagement. Student Engagement in Europe: Society, Higher Education and Student Governance, 20, 1129.Google Scholar
Laurie, R., Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y., Mckeown, R., & Hopkins, C. (2016). Contributions of education for sustainable development (ESD) to quality education: A synthesis of research. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 10(2), 226242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leal Filho, W., Wolf, F., Lange Salvia, A., Beynaghi, A., Shulla, K., Kovaleva, M., & Vasconcelos, C.R. (2020). Heading towards an unsustainable world: Some of the implications of not achieving the SDGs. Discover Sustainability, 1(1), 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejano, R.P., Rahman, M.S., Kabir, L., & Urrutia, I. (2022). Perspectives from the field: Evaluation of a relational model of risk communication in the context of extreme weather. Climate Risk Management, 37, 100444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letouzé, E. (2016). Should ‘data literacy’ be promoted? UN World Data forum. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/undataforum/blog/should-data-literacy-be-promoted/#_edn2.Google Scholar
Levac, J., Toal-Sullivan, D., & O’Sullivan, T.L. (2012). Household emergency preparedness: A literature review. Journal of Community Health, 37(3), 725733. DOI: 10.1007/s10900-011-9488-x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, J.R. (2022). Why people adopt climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction behaviors: Integrated model of risk communication and results from hurricanes, floods, and wildfires. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 103(10), E2440E2469.Google Scholar
Lim, J.R., Liu, B.F., & Atwell Seate, A. (2022). Are you prepared for the next storm? Developing social norms messages to motivate community members to perform disaster risk mitigation behaviors. Risk Analysis, 42(11), 25502568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Littrell, M.K., Tayne, K., Okochi, C., Leckey, E., Gold, A.U., & Lynds, S. (2020). Student perspectives on climate change through place-based filmmaking. Environmental Education Research, 26(4), 594610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maidl, E., & Buchecker, M. (2015). Raising risk preparedness by flood risk communication. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 15(7), 15771595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhi, Y., Franklin, J., Seddon, N., Solan, M., Turner, M.G., Field, C.B., & Knowlton, N. (2020). Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions, vol. 375, pp. 20190104. The Royal Society.Google ScholarPubMed
Mechler, R., & Bouwer, L.M. (2015). Understanding trends and projections of disaster losses and climate change: Is vulnerability the missing link? Climatic Change, 133(1), 2335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, M.C., Andrews, E., & Biedenweg, K. (2008). A framework for environmental education strategies. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 6(3-4), 205216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, J.D., & Hedden, S. (2020). Are we on the right path to achieve the sustainable development goals? World Development, 127, 104749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odiyo, J.O., & Volenzo, T.E. (2019). Linking risk communication and sustainable climate change action: A conceptual framework. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 11(1), 111.Google Scholar
Olympia, R.P., Rivera, R., Heverley, S., Anyanwu, U., & Gregorits, M. (2010). Natural disasters and mass-casualty events affecting children and families: A description of emergency preparedness and the role of the primary care physician. Clinical Pediatrics, 49(7), 686698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paton, D. (2019). Disaster risk reduction: Psychological perspectives on preparedness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(4), 327341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perwitasari, S.I., Hariyono, E., & Susantini, E. (2023). Implementation of ESD (Education for Sustainable Development) in climate change learning: A literature review. IJORER: International Journal of Recent Educational Research, 4(4), 399415.Google Scholar
Peters, E., Boyd, P., Cameron, L.D., Contractor, N., Diefenbach, M.A., Fleszar-Pavlovic, S., Markowitz, E., Salas, R. N. & Stephens, K. K. (2022). Evidence-based recommendations for communicating the impacts of climate change on health. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 12(4), 543553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pfefferbaum, B., Pfefferbaum, R.L., & Van Horn, R.L. (2018). Involving children in disaster risk reduction: The importance of participation. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 9(sup2), 1425577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piao, X., & Managi, S. (2023). The international role of education in sustainable lifestyles and economic development. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 8733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J. (2015). Thirty years of terror management theory: From genesis to revelation. In Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 52, pp. 170). Elsevier.Google Scholar
Ralls, D., Lahana, L., Towers, B., & Johnson, L. (2022). Reimagining education in a pandemic: Children and young people as powerful educators. In COVID-19 and education in the global north: Storytelling and alternative pedagogies (pp. 135). Springer.Google Scholar
Rap, S., Blonder, R., Sindiani-Bsoul, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (2022). Curriculum development for student agency on sustainability issues: An exploratory study. Frontiers in Education, 7: 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rap, S., Geller, S., Katchevich, D., Gbarin, H., & Blonder, R. (2023). “Chemistry, climate and the skills in between”: mapping cognitive skills in an innovative program designed to empower future citizens to address global challenges. Chemistry Teacher International, 5(2): 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reis, G., & Roth, W.M. (2007). Environmental education in action: A discursive approach to curriculum design. Environmental Education Research, 13(3), 307327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, C.E. (1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s.Google Scholar
Ruiter, R.A., Kessels, L.T., Peters, G.J.Y., & Kok, G. (2014). Sixty years of fear appeal research: Current state of the evidence. International Journal of Psychology, 49(2), 6370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, L.K., Ross, H.C., Shouldice, S.A., & Wolfe, S.E. (2022). Mortality management and climate action: A review and reference for using Terror Management Theory methods in interdisciplinary environmental research. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 13(4), e776.Google Scholar
Stollberg, J., & Jonas, E. (2021). Existential threat as a challenge for individual and collective engagement: Climate change and the motivation to act. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 145150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suldovsky, B. (2017). The information deficit model and climate change communication. In Oxford research encyclopedia of climate science. Google Scholar
Taimur, S., & Sattar, H. (2020). Education for sustainable development and critical thinking competency. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P.G., Wall, T. (eds) Quality Education. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (pp 238–248). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95870-5_64.Google Scholar
Tong, S., Bambrick, H., Beggs, P.J., Chen, L., Hu, Y., Ma, W., Steffen, W., Tan, J. (2022). Current and future threats to human health in the Anthropocene. Environment International, 158, 106892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
UNDESA. (2023a). The 17 goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals.Google Scholar
UNDESA. (2023b). Sustainable development goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals.Google Scholar
UNDRR. (2023). Implementing the Sendai framework. https://www.undrr.org/implementing-sendai-framework.Google Scholar
UNESCO. (2015). Global citizenship education: Topics and learning objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232993.Google Scholar
Van Aalst, M.K. (2006). The impacts of climate change on the risk of natural disasters. Disasters, 30(1), 518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verlie, B. (2019). Bearing worlds: Learning to live-with climate change. Environmental Education Research, 25(5), 751766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verlie, B., & Flynn, A. (2022). School strike for climate: A reckoning for education. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 38(1), 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, C., Nkrumah, B., Kosciulek, D., Lebea, D., Booth, T., & Brown, M. (2022). Empowering youth as change agents for climate change in South Africa: Challenges, caveats and course corrections. Journal of Youth Studies, 25(6), 812832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, S.E., & Tubi, A. (2019). Terror Management Theory and mortality awareness: A missing link in climate response studies? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 10(2), e566.Google Scholar
Zhao, W., Yin, C., Hua, T., Meadows, M.E., Li, Y., Liu, Y., Cherubini, F., Pereira, P., Fu, B. (2022). Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in the post-pandemic era. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. A schematic representation of the interlinks between Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) knowledge, data-based argumentation skills and students’ activism (based on Rap et al., 2022).