Caring for the Environment: Challenges from Notions of Caring

In a previous issue of this journal, John Fien (2003) argued for an environmental education that broadens its theoretical framework beyond sociological and educational theory “to draw on the humanities, the arts, philosophy and ethics to learn how to care for, and yes, love, each other and the Earth” (p. 2). In developing his position, Fien referred to the writings of philosopher Nel Noddings (1984; 1992) among others, and especially to her work on caring. He notes that Noddings’ conception of caring has three requirements – conceptual and emotive understanding, deep respect and intrinsic worth of others, and a willingness to act for the other – and equates this to what Stan van Hooft terms “deep caring” (1995). From this brief descriptive framework, Fien moved to consider the moral obligations of humankind to care deeply about all aspects of nature and the values that might constitute an ethic of deep caring. He did not pursue, in any detail, the generative possibilities and educational implications of Noddings’ components for an environmental education underpinned by an ethic of care. In this article, I will examine the underlying structure of Noddings’ philosophy of caring, including the components noted above, and explore the implications for environmental education. I have used Noddings’ work before (Martin, 1999) and found her philosophical analysis to be robust and useful in providing a clear conceptual framework from which to construct education for the environment. Abstract In 2003 John Fien presented an argument for environmental education to encompass deep and wide caring for human and nonhuman nature (Fien, 2003). His philosophical discussion of care outlined work by Nel Noddings (1984; 1992). In this paper I continue that project by indicating how Noddings’ work provides signposts for environmental educators to think about their students’ relationships with the nonhuman natural world. I argue that one consequence of Noddings’ conception of care is that advocacy for considering humans to be a part of nature might be counterproductive to developing a student’s capacity to understand a caring relationship with nature. In conclusion I draw on the structure of a care ethic to suggest practical implications for environmental education and the development of a relational self.