Innovation through action research in environmental education : from project to praxis

This thesis is a work-in-progress that articulates my research journey based on the development of a curriculum innovation in environmental education. This journey had two distinct, but intertwined phases: action research based fieldwork, conducted collaboratively, to create a whole school approach to environmental education curriculum planning; and a phase of analysis and reflection based on the emerging findings, as I sought to create personal "living educational theory" about change and innovation. A key stimulus for the study was the perceived theory-practice gap in environmental education, which is often presented in the literature as a criticism of teachers for failing to achieve the values and action objectives of critical environmental education. Hence, many programs and projects are considered to be superficial and inconsequential in terms of their ability to seriously address environmental issues. The intention of this study was to work with teachers in a project that would be an exemplar of critical environmental education. This would be in the form of a whole school "learnscaping" curriculum in a primary school whereby the schoolgrounds would be utilised for interdisciplinary critical environment education. Parallel with the three cycles of action research in this project, my research objectives were to identify and comment upon the factors that influence the generation of successful educational innovation. It was anticipated that the project would be a collaboration involving me, as researcher-facilitator, and many of the teachers in the school as active participants. As the project proceeded through its action cycles, however, it became obvious that the goal of developing a critical environmental education curriculum, and the use of highly participatory processes, were unrealistic. Institutional and organisational rigidities in education generally, teachers' day-to-day work demands, and the constant juggle of work, family and other responsibilities for all participants acted as significant constraints. Consequently, it became apparent that the learnscaping curriculum would not be the hoped-for exemplar. Progress was slow and, at times, the project was in danger of stalling permanently. While the curriculum had some elements of critical environmental education, these were minor and not well spread throughout the school. Overall, the outcome seemed best described as a "small win"; perhaps just another example of the theory-practice gap that I had hoped this project would bridge. Towards the project's end, however, my continuing reflection led to an exploration of chaos/complexity theory which gave new meaning to the concept of a "small win". According to this theory, change is not the product of linear processes applied methodically in purposeful and diligent ways, but emerges from serendipitous events that cannot be planned for, or forecast in advance. When this perspective of change is applied to human organisations - in this study, a busy school - the context for change is recognised not as a stable, predictable environment, but as a highly complex system where change happens all the time, cannot be controlled, and no one can be really sure where the impacts might lead. This so-called "butterfly effect" is a central idea of this theory where small changes or modifications are created - the effects of which are difficult to know, let alone determine - and which can have large-scale impacts. Allied with this effect is the belief that long term developments in an organisation that takes complexity into account, emerge by spontaneous self-organising evolution, requiring political interaction and learning in groups, rather than systematic progress towards predetermined goals or "visions". Hence, because change itself and the contexts of change are recognised as complex, chaos/complexity theory suggests that change is more likely to be slow and evolutionary - cultural change - rather than fast and revolutionary where the old is quickly ushered out by radical reforms and replaced by new structures and processes. Slow, small-scale changes are "normal", from a complexity viewpoint, while rapid, wholesale change is both unlikely and unrealistic. Therefore, the frustratingly slow, small-scale, imperfect educational changes that teachers create - including environmental education initiatives - should be seen for what they really are. They should be recognised as successful changes, the impacts of which cannot be known, but which have the potential to magnify into large-scale changes into the future. Rather than being regarded as failures for not meeting critical education criteria, "small wins" should be cause for celebration and support. The intertwined phases of collaborative action research and individual researcher reflection are mirrored in the thesis structure. The first three chapters, respectively, provide the thesis overview, the literature underpinning the study's central concern, and the research methodology. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 report on each of the three action research cycles of the study, namely Laying the Groundwork, Down to Work!, and The Never-ending Story. Each of these chapters presents a narrative of events, a literature review specific to developments in the cycle, and analysis and critique of the events, processes and outcomes of each cycle. Chapter 7 provides a synthesis of the whole of the study, outlining my interim propositions about facilitating curriculum change in schools through action research, and the implications of these for environmental education.

The science of assessment : identifying and predicting environmental impacts

The historical challenge of environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been to predict project-based impacts accurately. Both EIA legislation and the practice of EIA have evolved over the last three decades in Canada, and the development of the discipline and science of environmental assessment has improved how we apply environmental assessment to complex projects. The practice of environmental assessment integrates the social and natural sciences and relies on an eclectic knowledge base from a wide range of sources. EIA methods and tools provide a means to structure and integrate knowledge in order to evaluate and predict environmental impacts.----- This Chapter will provide a brief overview of how impacts are identified and predicted. How do we determine what aspect of the natural and social environment will be affected when a mine is excavated? How does the practitioner determine the range of potential impacts, assess whether they are significant, and predict the consequences? There are no standard answers to these questions, but there are established methods to provide a foundation for scoping and predicting the potential impacts of a project.----- Of course, the community and publics play an important role in this process, and this will be discussed in subsequent chapters. In the first part of this chapter, we will deal with impact identification, which involves appplying scoping to critical issues and determining impact significance, baseline ecosystem evaluation techniques, and how to communicate environmental impacts. In the second part of the chapter, we discuss the prediction of impacts in relation to the complexity of the environment, ecological risk assessment, and modelling.

Research Monograph: Building Online Participatory Systems: Towards the Community Based Interactive Environmental Decision Support Systems

The importance of broadening community participation in environmental decision-making is widely recognized and lack of participation in this process appears to be a perennial problem. In this context, there have been calls from some academics for the more extensive use of geographic information systems (GIS) and distance learning technologies, accessible via the Internet, as a possible means to inform and empower communities. However, a number of problems exist. For instance, at present the scope for online interaction between policy-makers and citizens is currently limited. Contemporary web-based environmental information systems suffer from this lack of interactivity on the one hand and on the other hand from the apparent complexity for the lay user. This paper explores the issue of online community participation at the local level and attempts to construct a framework for a new (and potentially more effective) model of online participatory decision-making. The key components, system architecture and stages of such a model are introduced. This model, referred to as a ‘Community Based Interactive Environmental Decision Support System’, incorporates advanced information technologies, distance learning and community involvement tools which will be applied and evaluated in the field through a pilot project in Tokyo in the summer of 2002.

Environmental assessment for commercial buildings: Stakeholder requirements and tool characteristics

The Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation (CRC CI) is a national research, development and implementation centre focused on the needs of the property, design, construction and facility management sectors. Established in 2001 and headquartered at Queensland University of Technology as an unincorporated joint venture under the Australian Government's Cooperative Research Program, the CRC CI is developing key technologies, tools and management systems to improve the effectiveness of the construction industry. The CRC CI is a seven year project funded by a Commonwealth grant and industry, research and other government support. More than 150 researchers and an alliance of 19 leading partner organisations are involved in and support the activities of the CRC CI

International review of environmental assessment tools and databases

Existing widely known environmental assessment models, primarily those for Life Cycle Assessment of manufactured products and buildings, were reviewed to grasp their characteristics, since the past several years have seen a significant increase in interest and research activity in the development of building environmental assessment methods. Each method or tool was assessed under the headings of description, data requirement, end-use, assessment criteria (scale of assessment and scoring/ weighting system)and present status

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition in development projects

New product development projects are experiencing increasing internal and external project complexity. Complexity leadership theory proposes that external complexity requires adaptive and enabling leadership, which facilitates opportunity recognition (OR). We ask whether internal complexity also requires OR for increased adaptability. We extend a model of EO and OR to conclude that internal complexity may require more careful OR. This means that leaders of technically or structurally complex projects need to evaluate opportunities more carefully than those in projects with external or technological complexity.

An institutional understanding of triple bottom line evaluations and the use of social and environmental metrics

Measuring social and environmental metrics of property is necessary for meaningful triple bottom line (TBL) assessments. This paper demonstrates how relevant indicators derived from environmental rating systems provide for reasonably straightforward collations of performance scores that support adjustments based on a sliding scale. It also highlights the absence of a corresponding consensus of important social metrics representing the third leg of the TBL tripod. Assessing TBL may be unavoidably imprecise, but if valuers and managers continue to ignore TBL concerns, their assessments may soon be less relevant given the emerging institutional milieu informing and reflecting business practices and society expectations.

Identification of key environmental issues for building materials

Manufacture, construction and use of buildings and building materials make a significant environmental impact internally (inside the building), locally (neighbourhood) and globally. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is being applied for evaluating the environmental impact of building/or building materials. One of the major applications of LCA is to identify key issues of a product system from cradle to grave. Key issues identified in an LCA lead one to the right direction in assessing the environmental aspects of a product system and help to identify the areas for improvement of the environmental performance of a product as well. The purpose of this paper is to suggest two methods for identifying key issues using an integrated tool (LCADesign), which has been developed to provide a method of determining the best alternative for reducing environmental impacts from a building or building materials, and compare both methods in the case study. This paper assists the designers or marketers related to building or building materials in their decision making by giving information on activities or alternatives which are identified as key issues for environmental impacts.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition and exploitation in development projects

Principal Topic: Project structures are often created by entrepreneurs and large corporate organizations to develop new products. Since new product development projects (NPDP) are more often situated within a larger organization, intrapreneurship or corporate entrepreneurship plays an important role in bringing these projects to fruition. Since NPDP often involves the development of a new product using immature technology, we describe development of an immature technology. The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft is being developed by the U.S. Department of Defense and eight allied nations. In 2001 Lockheed Martin won a $19 billion contract to develop an affordable, stealthy and supersonic all-weather strike fighter designed to replace a wide range of aging fighter aircraft. In this research we define a complex project as one that demonstrates a number of sources of uncertainty to a degree, or level of severity, that makes it extremely difficult to predict project outcomes, to control or manage project (Remington & Zolin, Forthcoming). Project complexity has been conceptualized by Remington and Pollock (2007) in terms of four major sources of complexity; temporal, directional, structural and technological complexity (See Figure 1). Temporal complexity exists when projects experience significant environmental change outside the direct influence or control of the project. The Global Economic Crisis of 2008 - 2009 is a good example of the type of environmental change that can make a project complex as, for example in the JSF project, where project managers attempt to respond to changes in interest rates, international currency exchange rates and commodity prices etc. Directional complexity exists in a project where stakeholders' goals are unclear or undefined, where progress is hindered by unknown political agendas, or where stakeholders disagree or misunderstand project goals. In the JSF project all the services and all non countries have to agree to the specifications of the three variants of the aircraft; Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL), Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) and the Carrier Variant (CV). Because the Navy requires a plane that can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, that required a special variant of the aircraft design, adding complexity to the project. Technical complexity occurs in a project using technology that is immature or where design characteristics are unknown or untried. Developing a plane that can take off on a very short runway and land vertically created may highly interdependent technological challenges to correctly locate, direct and balance the lift fans, modulate the airflow and provide equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft and at the same time control engine temperatures. These technological challenges make costing and scheduling equally challenging. Structural complexity in a project comes from the sheer numbers of elements such as the number of people, teams or organizations involved, ambiguity regarding the elements, and the massive degree of interconnectedness between them. While Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, they are assisted in major aspects of the JSF development by Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Pratt & Whitney and GE/Rolls-Royce Fighter Engineer Team and innumerable subcontractors. In addition to identifying opportunities to achieve project goals, complex projects also need to identify and exploit opportunities to increase agility in response to changing stakeholder demands or to reduce project risks. Complexity Leadership Theory contends that in complex environments adaptive and enabling leadership are needed (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKelvey, 2007). Adaptive leadership facilitates creativity, learning and adaptability, while enabling leadership handles the conflicts that inevitably arise between adaptive leadership and traditional administrative leadership (Uhl-Bien and Marion, 2007). Hence, adaptive leadership involves the recognition and opportunities to adapt, while and enabling leadership involves the exploitation of these opportunities. Our research questions revolve around the type or source of complexity and its relationship to opportunity recognition and exploitation. For example, is it only external environmental complexity that creates the need for the entrepreneurial behaviours, such as opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? Do the internal dimensions of project complexity, such as technological and structural complexity, also create the need for opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? The Kropp, Zolin and Lindsay model (2009) describes a relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO), opportunity recognition (OR), and opportunity exploitation (OX) in complex projects, with environmental and organizational contextual variables as moderators. We extend their model by defining the affects of external complexity and internal complexity on OR and OX. ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: When the environment complex EO is more likely to result in OR because project members will be actively looking for solutions to problems created by environmental change. But in projects that are technologically or structurally complex project leaders and members may try to make the minimum changes possible to reduce the risk of creating new problems due to delays or schedule changes. In projects with environmental or technological complexity project leaders who encourage the innovativeness dimension of EO will increase OR in complex projects. But projects with technical or structural complexity innovativeness will not necessarily result in the recognition and exploitation of opportunities due to the over-riding importance of maintaining stability in the highly intricate and interconnected project structure. We propose that in projects with environmental complexity creating the need for change and innovation project leaders, who are willing to accept and manage risk, are more likely to identify opportunities to increase project effectiveness and efficiency. In contrast in projects with internal complexity a much higher willingness to accept risk will be necessary to trigger opportunity recognition. In structurally complex projects we predict it will be less likely to find a relationship between risk taking and OP. When the environment is complex, and a project has autonomy, they will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. When a project experiences high competitive aggressiveness and their environment is complex, project leaders will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. This paper reports the first stage of a three year study into the behaviours of managers, leaders and team members of complex projects. We conduct a qualitative study involving a Group Discussion with experienced project leaders. The objective is to determine how leaders of large and potentially complex projects perceive that external and internal complexity will influence the affects of EO on OR. ---------- Results and Implications: These results will help identify and distinguish the impact of external and internal complexity on entrepreneurial behaviours in NPDP. Project managers will be better able to quickly decide how and when to respond to changes in the environment and internal project events.

Developing a life-cycle costing analysis model for sustainability enhancement in road infrastructure project

With increasing pressure to provide environmentally responsible infrastructure products and services, stakeholders are putting significant foci on the early identification of financial viability and outcome of infrastructure projects. Traditionally, there has been an imbalance between sustainable measures and project budget. On one hand, the industry tends to employ the first-cost mentality and approach to developing infrastructure projects. On the other, environmental experts and technology innovators often push for the ultimately green products and systems without much of a concern for cost. This situation is being quickly changed as the industry is under pressure to continue to return profit, while better adapting to current and emerging global issues of sustainability. For the infrastructure sector to contribute to sustainable development, it will need to increase value and efficiency. Thus, there is a great need for tools that will enable decision makers evaluate competing initiatives and identify the most sustainable approaches to procuring infrastructure projects. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the concept of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) will play significant roles in the economics of an infrastructure project. Recently, a few research initiatives have applied the LCCA models for road infrastructure that focused on the traditional economics of a project. There is little coverage of life-cycle costing as a method to evaluate the criteria and assess the economic implications of pursuing sustainability in road infrastructure projects. To rectify this problem, this paper reviews the theoretical basis of previous LCCA models before discussing their inability to determinate the sustainability indicators in road infrastructure project. It then introduces an on-going research aimed at developing a new model to integrate the various new cost elements based on the sustainability indicators with the traditional and proven LCCA approach. It is expected that the research will generate a working model for sustainability based life-cycle cost analysis.

PIPP #1 - Pedestrian Interaction Patch Project

The Pedestrian Interaction Patch Project (PIPP) seeks to exert influence over and encourage abnormal pedestrian behavior. By placing an unadvertised (and non recording) interactive video manipulation system and projection source in a high traffic public area, the PIPP allows pedestrians to privately (and publically) re-engage with a previously inactive physical environment, like a commonly used walkway or corridor. This system, the results of which are projected in real time on the architectural surface, inadvertently provides pedestrians with questions around preconceived notions of self and space. In an attempt to re-activate our relationship with the physical surrounds we occupy each day the PIPP creates a new set of memories to be recalled as we re-enter known environments once PIPP has moved on and as such re-enlivens our relationship with the everyday architecture we stroll past everyday. The PIPP environment is controlled using the software program Isadora, devised by Mark Coniglio at Troika Ranch, and contains a series of video manipulation patches that are designed to not only grab the pedestrians attention but to also encourage a sense of play and interaction between the architecture, the digital environment, the initially unsuspecting participant(s) and the pedestrian audience. The PIPP was included as part of the planned walking tour for the “Playing in Urban Spaces” seminar day, and was an installation that ran for the length of the symposium in a reclaimed pedestrian space that was encountered by both the participants and general public during the course of the day long event. Ideally once discovered PIPP encouraged pedestrians to return through the course of the seminar day to see if the environmental patches had changed or altered, and changed their standard route to include the PIPP installation or to avoid it, either way, encouraging an active response to the pathways normally traveled or newly discovered each day.

The importance of environmental issues and costs in Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) for highway projects

Sustainability has been increasingly recognised as an integral part of highway infrastructure development. In practice however, the fact that financial return is still a project’s top priority for many, environmental aspects tend to be overlooked or considered as a burden, as they add to project costs. Sustainability and its implications have a far-reaching effect on each project over time. Therefore, with highway infrastructure’s long-term life span and huge capital demand, the consideration of environmental cost/ benefit issues is more crucial in life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). To date, there is little in existing literature studies on viable estimation methods for environmental costs. This situation presents the potential for focused studies on environmental costs and issues in the context of life-cycle cost analysis. This paper discusses a research project which aims to integrate the environmental cost elements and issues into a conceptual framework for life cycle costing analysis for highway projects. Cost elements and issues concerning the environment were first identified through literature. Through questionnaires, these environmental cost elements will be validated by practitioners before their consolidation into the extension of existing and worked models of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA). A holistic decision support framework is being developed to assist highway infrastructure stakeholders to evaluate their investment decision. This will generate financial returns while maximising environmental benefits and sustainability outcome.