Content uploaded by Kelly Biedenweg
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kelly Biedenweg
Content may be subject to copyright.
The importance of teaching ethics
of sustainability
Kelly Biedenweg, Martha C. Monroe and Annie Oxarart
School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida,
Gainesville, Florida, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the importance of a focus on ethics in
sustainability education and present results from a pilot graduate-level course titled the Ethics of
Sustainability.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a case study presenting a qualitative evaluation from a
pilot 14-week Ethics of Sustainability course. Data are based on observations, surveys and interviews
with students.
Findings – Students from diverse fields found the ethical concepts new, stimulating and crucial for
their careers. Ethical concepts provide a framework for thinking about sustainable practices in their
personal and professional lives.
Research limitations/implications – Findings are based on a single pilot course and
post-participation responses. Future research could explore different teaching strategies and different
institutions, and use pre/post studies.
Practical implications – This study suggests that a course on ethical principles related to
sustainability is a useful and potentially critical component to any curriculum intending to prepare
future professionals to be effective contributors to a sustainable society. Higher education may adopt
the course concepts and learning tools to enhance their curriculum and businesses and corporations
will benefit from entry-level professionals with a solid ethical foundation for making more
sustainability-oriented decisions.
Originality/value – The paper discusses an innovative course designed with funding from the US
National Science Foundation. It confirms the benefit and provides some content advice for a course
oriented toward ethics in sustainability curricula.
Keywords Ethics, Sustainability, Higher education, Teaching
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Education for sustainability in higher education prepares future professionals to be
effective citizens in a more sustainable society. Curricula that emphasize sustainability
cover a range of topics based on the academic department (Barlett and Chase, 2004), but
rarely dedicate time to instilling a deeper understanding of the ethical principles that
provide the backbone for sustainability (Muijen, 2004). Rather, sustainability education
often engages students in practical activities such as campus greening initiatives;
sustainable technology competitions; field visits to learn about sustainable practices;
expanded environmental studies courses; and explorations of how society, nature and
economics interact through global studies (Tilbury et al., 2002; Jacobson et al., 2006;
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1467-6370.htm
Funding for the development of the course was provided by NSF Award 0832891. Charles Kibert,
Les Thiele, Anna Peterson, Martha Monroe and Richard Plate authored the Working Toward
Sustainability: Ethical Decision-Making in a Technological World textbook and taught the pilot
course. Deb Wojcik co-authored the instructor’s guide for the course.
IJSHE
14,1
6
Received 16 December 2010
Revised 11 June 2011
Accepted 30 November 2011
International Journal of Sustainability
in Higher Education
Vol. 14 No. 1, 2013
pp. 6-14
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1467-6370
DOI 10.1108/14676371311288912
Cortese, 1999; Buchan et al., 2007; Hayles and Holdsworth, 2008). While these are all
worthy endeavors for helping students apply techniques and strategies, the authors’
experience suggests that a foundation in ethics as it relates to sustainability is a critical
component in the education of all future professionals because it provides a structure for
understanding the moral basis for decisions about which technique or strategy to
employ.
Ethics defines good and bad (Peterson, 2009). It helps people decide how to live and
what to buy (Irving et al., 2002). When applied to institutions, it allows groups to
determine fair and appropriate procedures (Ferrell et al., 2011). Decisions about whether
to implement new technology, for example, are firmly based in sustainability ethics if the
environmental, economic, and social consequences are considered for future generations
of people and non-human organisms. When necessary information is not available,
moral rules are used to decide how much knowledge is enough (Tversky and Kahneman,
1986; March, 1994). Ethical principles about precaution, reversibility, and future
generations that come from the thinking of Plato, Kant, Bentham, and Dewey help
individuals wrestle with our moral obligation to those less fortunate, to non-human
organisms, and to whole communities (Kibert et al., 2011; Muijen, 2004).
Sustainability-based rules and processes such as the platinum principle, the polluter
pays principle, multi-stakeholder engagement, and various measures of well-being are
practical tools that help people rank options and select outcomes that maximize
sustainability. As part of higher education curricula, each of these ethical principles and
rules can assist students in assessing their future decisions as engineers, researchers,
managers, designers, and consumers of products that purport to enhance sustainability
(Kibert et al., 2011).
This case study describes the implementation and evaluation of a college-level
course that covered these topics. It is not intended as a research paper; rather, this
article is an exploration into the methods and results of one pilot test. The course,
designed by an interdisciplinary team of professors and graduate students, was
introduced at the University of Florida. It was intended for graduate students in the
fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), as they are
considered to be the fields which will contribute new ideas that further our society’s
development. Based on the success of its debut instruction, the authors suggest that
such a course is important for all future professionals.
Course description
The Ethics of Sustainability course was designed in 2008-2009 by professors with
expertise in the fields of ethics, political science, architecture and design, curriculum
development, and natural resource management. These professors wrote the
foundational text with assistance from their graduate students while a team of
graduate students designed a curriculum guide with learning activities to complement
the readings. The course was intended for graduate students and professionals whose
fields could pertain to sustainability, but whose emphasis was not on the ethical or social
components of sustainability.
In the spring of 2010, the Ethics of Sustainability course was taught by the same
professors to a group of 27 graduate students from approximately nine fields of study.
Their fields included building construction, agriculture education, religion, political
science, forestry, wildlife, and engineering. Females slightly outnumbered male students
Teaching ethics
of sustainability
7
at 59 percent, and more students were in a masters program than a doctoral. Each
professor took the lead for the three weeks of the course that corresponded to the book
chapters he or she wrote. Students were required to read the book chapter and
supplemental readings prior to class, and each class was taught through a combination
of slideshow presentations that clarified fundamental concepts and in-class activities
and discussions that emphasized critically thinking about the application of the topics to
their personal and professional lives.
The first section of the course reviewed the challenges of sustainability and the role
of technology in society. The next and largest section placed emphasis on
understanding key ethical principles and how they relate to sustainability issues;
the last section introduced practical tools for applying ethical principles in decision
making to emphasize sustainability. Specific ethical principles included the social
justice concepts of equitable distribution, the precautionary principle, and the golden
and platinum rules; environmental ethics such as the land ethic and deep ecology; and
components of ecological economics. Practical tools for applying these principles
included systems thinking, multi-stakeholder processes, full-cost analyses, and
polluter pays policies. Activities provided students with the opportunity to understand
and apply these concepts through small and large group discussions; a debate; role
play; videos; technology, entertainment and design (TED) talks; and readings with
corresponding homework exercises. Small groups were often formed to include
students from different fields of study, and students rotated groups throughout the
course. A final assignment allowed students to combine the ethical principles into a
larger ethical decision-making framework and describe how the principles have been
applied in various contexts through in-depth research on the sustainability plan of a
specific company, project or program.
Evaluation methods
The authors used qualitative methods to explore the effectiveness of this pilot course at
influencing students’ understanding of ethical principles related to sustainability and
their intentions of using ethical principles to improve sustainability decisions in their
future careers. The evaluation had many components. First, students were asked at the
beginning of each class period to respond to three or four brief questions pertaining to
the textbook content. The purpose of these short answers was to discern where
students were having trouble understanding content and where the textbook should be
written more clearly.
Second, throughout the entire 15-week course, an evaluator who was not involved in
the development of the course materials attended class. This observer took notes on the
teaching tools used, how they differed from the original activity designs in the
Curriculum Guide, and how students appeared to respond to the lesson. Last, at the end
of the semester, all students were asked to respond to a ten-question survey about:
.career aspirations;
.course expectations;
.how well the course met their expectations;
.what they learned from the course;
.what teaching tools were most effective for their learning;
.what aspects of the course were most important for their careers;
IJSHE
14,1
8
.what they intended to implement personally and professionally; and
.whether the course was an important aspect of the curriculum in their field.
Observation data were reviewed for contextual descriptors and qualitative survey data
were summarized and coded for similar ideas. Quantitative data were analyzed with
descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency.
Findings
18 of the original 27 students chose to participate in the voluntary evaluation. They
represented career interests in ten different areas: law, politics, academics, planning,
architecture, construction, business, non-profit management, environmental science,
and non-formal environmental education. Their experience with sustainability topics
was minimal for one person and all others had taken multiple courses that highlighted
sustainability (Table I). Only one, however, described any prior knowledge of ethical
principles related to sustainability. Six had professionally worked on sustainability
topics such as LEED projects, sustainable education publications, and environmental
non-profit management. Four others had participated in sustainable design
competitions or taught courses related to sustainable design and horticulture. Two
considered sustainability to be the central theme of their masters or doctoral theses.
Students took the course for a variety of reasons, the most common of which was to
arm themselves with a general understanding of applied sustainability topics for their
future careers (n¼9). Other reasons were that it fulfilled a new degree requirement or
fit their schedule (n¼5), that they had a general interest in taking an ethics class
(n¼3), and a belief that it would provide a strong foundation for their graduate degree
(n¼2).
From the in-class observations, students seemed interested and engaged in the
course content; they regularly contributed ideas and questions about the concepts
being discussed. Diverse opinions and perspectives about sustainability issues and
ethical principles were raised by students, often leading to additional class discussion.
Many students shared how they felt the ethical principles applied to their daily lives
and decisions. Fewer students forecasted how these principles related to their future
profession or to a specific institutional context.
Observations also revealed that most in-class activities were well-received by
students. They appeared to enjoy interacting in small groups, and generally stayed
on-task. In some cases, students became so involved in small group discussions that
they needed additional time to complete the task. Students were particularly
enthusiastic during a multi-stakeholder process role-play for determining policies
about genetically modified organisms. Many students eagerly assumed their assigned
role and shared their perspective with the class. Based on their comments, it was
Attended college courses with sustainability focus 17
Professional experience 6
Design competitions 2
Taught courses with sustainability focus 2
Central theme of master’s or dissertation 2
Note: n¼18
Table I.
Respondents’ source of
prior knowledge
of sustainability
Teaching ethics
of sustainability
9
apparent that this activity allowed students to learn about different viewpoints and the
power of negotiation.
In their written surveys, all students reported learning critical aspects about
sustainability from participation in the course. First, they gained more detailed
understanding of diverse ethical principles that are normally glossed over, or often left
out of discussions of technology and decision-making. They grew to recognize that
sustainability is not just about environmentalism or energy efficient technologies. The
social justice component was new to some and greatly enhanced for others. “Now I feel
a stronger tie between social and environmental forces,” explained one student. And
another explained:
I used to think sustainability was an economic and ecological issue (and didn’t incorporate the
importance of social considerations). Now I see that sustainability [requires not only]
behavior change, but also technology, social, economic and ecological impacts.
This amplification of sustainability to incorporate ideas from outside their fields made
it “no longer a black and white issue in my head” for one student.
In addition to expanding the context of sustainability, the Ethics of Sustainability
course increased the tools available to students for promoting sustainability in their
professions. One student explained, “Never before [had I] thought about how ethics and
decision making play a role in sustainability [...]” Similarly, a student mentioned the
new degree to which she believes multi-stakeholder groups need to work together to
make sustainability decisions. Another mentioned that the use of full-cost accounting
would be helpful in her career, while one admitted that for the first time she saw
technology as both a solution and a problem.
14 students described their intention to implement many of these concepts and tools
in their professional and personal lives (Figure 1). Seven students’ professional
intentions were oriented toward applying their greater understanding of social,
economic and environmental ethics to evaluate materials and decisions made and used
in their offices. Two students also felt committed to developing a sustainability plan for
their non-profit organization or using multi-stakeholder processes and adaptive
management for decision-making and project monitoring. Five students described
Figure 1.
Students’ intentions for
using the information
gained in the ethics of
sustainability course
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
intend to implement
concepts
professionally or
personally
apply concepts to
evaluate materials
and decisions
at work
intend to develop a
sustainability plan for
non-profit or use tools
intend to adapt
lifestyle and
consumer choices
believe they already
implement the ideas
presented in class
Number of Students
Note: n = 18
IJSHE
14,1
10
personal intentions that included being more conscious of their carbon footprint and
adapting their consumption choices to consider the sustainability of the product and the
manufacturer’s practices. Two students felt they already implemented many of the ideas
presented in the class and thus would not alter their behaviors. Two others felt the class
was more oriented toward the global complexity of the issue of sustainability and thus
did not provide them practical ideas for personal implementation.
Prior to the Ethics of Sustainability course, only 60 percent of these graduate students
felt it was important to incorporate sustainability ideals and practices into their future
career. After the course, 94 percent of these students agreed with this intention. Students
from the building construction field shifted their opinion the most. One explained that
her primary goal was to get a job, and then she would work within the existing system to
see if opportunities existed to implement sustainability practices. One apparent result of
the Ethics of Sustainability class was to demonstrate that sustainability is already
practiced in some companies and students could and should publicize their
sustainability knowledge to increase their competiveness as employees.
Elements of the course that most influenced student learning and behavior intentions
included the in-class activities (n¼7) and readings (n¼6) (Figure 2).
Particularly effective in-class activities included those that required students to
practice a sustainability tool and actively consider different ethical viewpoints. Small
group work, papers that required action and analysis, class discussions on the ethical
conceptual framework, and lectures were also most helpful to some. Potentially the most
critical learning aspect of the course, however, was the opportunity to engage with
a diversity of students and professors, as described by two students below:
By talking, brainstorming with students from various fields I was able to logically reach
solutions to problems of sustainability that I myself was not familiar with before.
Being around students and professors with differing perspectives (especially those whose
primary driver is economic or profit driven) [was most helpful to my learning]. I may disagree
with them fundamentally but it helps me better strategize my conservation efforts and
[environmental education] programming.
Figure 2.
Elements of the ethics of
sustainability course that
most affected learning
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
In-class
activities
Readings Group work Class
discussions
Papers Lectures Lear ning
environment
with diverse
ideas
Number of Students
Teaching ethics
of sustainability
11
Although students found the course generally effective, they suggested a variety of
improvements to aid their learning. Specifically, students expressed a need to visualize
and understand how ethical principles can actually be implemented in a clear, practical
manner. At times the lectures accompanied by slideshow presentations and in-class
discussions of the concepts did not fulfill these needs. Students suggested beginning or
ending each class with a brief case study that demonstrated one ethical principle being
practiced by an organization, program or project. They also suggested more practice
activities such as the role play on multi-stakeholder processes. Most importantly, a few
students found the class to be depressing and requested that practical examples and
case studies be more positive and give hope for solutions and strategies that can be
implemented.
Finally, students were asked whether they found this course important for their
future careers. About 88 percent felt it was extremely important, even if they perceived
that their departments would not agree. One student responded, for example, that “the
legal field doesn’t think so, but I do.” Another explained that:
Though it may be perceived as “hippie” and “liberal” to the [Building Construction] world,
I highly recommend this to be incorporated into [Building Construction] curriculum.
Most believed, however, that the course was cross-departmental. “All principles could
be instilled in any industry, so more students should be taking this class,” claimed one
student. About 10 percent of respondents who did not say it was extremely important
explained that it would depend on their final career path, whether “I go the old
fashioned ‘just build’ or ‘LEED’” and “what job I land.” In all, 94 percent felt the topic of
ethics for sustainability was worthy of an entire 15-week course, while one person
believed the concepts could be taught in one three or four-day session.
Conclusions
When thinking about sustainability education, it is easy to jump to practical applications
through technology, science, and other applied fields. A variety of behavioral research,
however, has found that values and social norms have an important influence on
behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 1985; Rogers, 1995; Schultz et al., 2005; Stern, 2000).
A potentially critical component to sustainability education, therefore, is an ethical
foundation, particularly for students in STEM fields who may be less familiar with the
humanitiesand social sciences. Understanding the ethical basis of sustainability-oriented
decision making is a powerful partner to the technical expertise of applied professionals
and can ensure the success of training future leaders for a more sustainable society.
This case study briefly describes a method for incorporating ethics into sustainability
education, and its potential impacts on student knowledge and intended professional and
personal behaviors. While the evaluation is limited to a single pilot course, these
preliminary results may inspire future research and course development. From the
students’ perspective, the most important aspects of the ethics of sustainability
course were the practical examples of how specific ethical principles have been applied
in the students’ particular fields. Additionally, activities that required students to engage
in the application of the principles, such as through a role play or simulation, were
extremely effective at demonstrating the real need for certain decision-making tools.
Because ethical principles are inherently intangible, the combination of ethics education,
real examples, and practical exercises is critical to promoting the adoption of ethical
IJSHE
14,1
12
thinking when making sustainability decisions. Discussions with students who held other
perspectives were also a critical component to their ethics education. Higher education
institutions with an education for sustainability curricula should consider offering and
potentially requiring an interdisciplinary course focused on the ethical components of
sustainability to provide a more holistic sustainability education to our future
professionals. Future research about this topic should consider at what stage in a
student’s education such a course is most effective, in which fields it is most critical, and
whether there are long-term behavioral effects of an ethics foundation that differ from a
curriculum focused on technical tools.
References
Ajzen, I. (1985), “From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior”, in Kuhl, J. and
Beckman, J. (Eds), Action-control: From Cognition to Behavior, Springer, New York, NY,
pp. 11-39.
Barlett, P. and Chase, G. (2004), “Introduction”, in Barlett, P. and Chase, G. (Eds),
Sustainability on Campus: Stories and Strategies for Change, MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA, pp. 1-28.
Cortese, A. (1999), Education for Sustainability: The Need for a New Human Perspective,
Second Nature, Inc., Boston, MA.
Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L. (2011), Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and
Cases, South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH.
Hayles, C.S. and Holdsworth, S.E. (2008), “Curriculum change for sustainability”, Journal for
Education in the Built Environment, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 25-48.
Irving, S., Harrison, R. and Rayner, M. (2002), “Ethical consumerism-democracy through the
wallet”, Journal of Research for Consumers, No. 3, pp. 1-20.
Jacobson, S., McDuff, M. and Monroe, M. (2006), Conservation Education and Outreach
Techniques, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Kibert, C., Thiele, L., Peterson, A., Monroe, M. and Plate, R. (2011), Working Toward Sustainability:
Ethical Decision-Making in a Technological World, Wiley, River Street Hoboken, NJ.
March, J. (1994), A Primer on Decision Making: How Decisions Happen, The Free Press,
New York, NY.
Muijen, H. (2004), “Integrating value education and sustainable development into a Dutch
university curriculum”, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 21-32.
Peterson, A. (2009), Everyday Ethics and Social Change: The Education of Desire, Columbia
University Press, New York, NY.
Rogers, E. (1995), The Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Schultz, P.W., Gouveia, V., Cameron, L., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P. and Franek, M. (2005), “Values
and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior”, Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 457-75.
Stern, P. (2000), “Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior”, Journal of
Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 407-24.
Tilbury, D., Stevenson, R., Fien, J. and Schreuder, D. (2002), Education and Sustainability:
Responding to the Global Challenge, IUCN, Gland.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1986), “Rational choice and the framing of decisions”, Journal of
Business, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 251-78.
Teaching ethics
of sustainability
13
About the authors
Kelly Biedenweg is a Social Scientist in natural resource management, with expertise in
education, evaluation, and international development. She holds an MS in Environmental Studies
from Antioch University New England and a PhD in Forest Resources and Conservation from
the University of Florida where she concentrated in social learning, conservation and
development, and environmental education. Kelly Biedenweg is the corresponding author and
can be contacted at: kellybiedenweg@ifcae.org
Martha C. Monroe is an extension specialist and Professor in Environmental Education at the
University of Florida in Gainesville. Her research explores strategies to prepare people to engage
in community problem solving through environmental education programming. She holds a BS,
MS, and PhD in Natural Resources from the University of Michigan, where she concentrated on
environmental policy, cognitive psychology, and environmental education.
Annie Oxarart is a Project Coordinator at the School of Forest Resources and Conservation,
University of Florida where she focuses on research and extension projects related to
environmental education programming and evaluation. She holds an MS in Forest Resources and
Conservation.
IJSHE
14,1
14
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
