作者：Rodrigues, C., & Arenas, A. (2022). Stockholm+ 50, Tbilisi+ 45, Rio+ 30: Research, praxis, and policy. The Journal of Environmental Education, 53(6), 309–313.
翻译和导语：吴蒙
导语：阅读的角度
A.环境教育
如果站在环境教育的角度，会觉得这篇有点莫名其妙地批评环境教育。
1. 文章里的呼吁，从社会科学的角度来看，比如正义、自然权利/内在价值、对可持续发展的批判，很多都是老生常谈。感觉应该有不少文献可以搜到，并不是没有成功案例。（虽然文章说At JEE we suggest the embracement of a life-affirming educational philosophy that replaces fear, dread, and fatalism with courage, joy, justice, and empowerment.，但是感觉这篇读起来比较负面。）
2. 看起来文章对短时方案有偏见。长期方案很精彩，但小而美短平快的短时方案也可能很不错，比如受众喜欢、激发兴趣。多个短时方案联合起来成效不一定比长期方案差。
3. 会议内容与实务工作者之间的关系，缺少实证。会议报告很有可能对读者不够友善，比如冗长或者缺少多语言版。EE实务工作者对这些会议有多大程度的了解，是有疑问的。而且需要了解到什么程度、是否只要大概了解即可，要看各自的背景而定。可能要研究一下EE实务工作者对这些会议的了解程度、每个人持有的教育立场、倾向的环境教育取向、如何影响对会议的认可，看看实务现场对这些会议的评价。（另外想到，可持续发展的论述广为人知，可能是它们的outreach做得好，有架构、可视化、简单明了好传播。）
B.环境教育与可持续发展教育的比较，维护环境教育
如果先阅读The Tbilisi Declaration和《教育促进实现可持续发展目标：学习目标》，体会一下可持续发展教育对生态中心主义的忽视，就会更加抓到这篇文献里面的一些理念，并非在批评环境教育。
另外补充对环境教育与可持续发展教育关系的观点和说明。
曾经看到文献/听到有研究者讲可持续发展教育可以等同于环境教育，只要看环境教育如何定义环境。他们的这种角度，可能比较从议题分类（非人环境、经济、社会）出发，认为环境包含非人环境、经济、社会，所以可持续发展教育的内容就是环境教育。或是这种等同的看法来自于，在区分强永续和弱永续(Morandín-Ahuerma, Contreras-Hernández, Ayala-Ortiz, and Pérez-Maqueo 2019)后，从强永续的角度，加上出于环境教育领域的背景，把强永续的优先考虑环境（以保障人类发展），补充成环境伦理中优先考虑环境的主体性。或是出于环境教育的背景，而自动把对可持续性的追求换成了环境保护/环境问题的解决，认为其中可以谈以环境为主体的可持续性。
但是就《教育促进实现可持续发展目标：学习目标》（以及可持续发展教育的来历）来说，可持续发展教育没有纳入生态中心主义，各种目标的内容都比较人类中心主义，围绕的是人类发展。所以环境教育的概念会更宽，因为环境教育会注意到应当强调生态中心主义。这也回到了Sauvé (2005)的分类，可持续发展教育是环境教育中的一个潮流。二者并不能等同。
Morandín-Ahuerma, I., Contreras-Hernández, A., Ayala-Ortiz, D. A., & Pérez-Maqueo, O. (2019). Socio–ecosystemic sustainability. Sustainability, 11(12), 3354.
Sauvé, L. (2005). Currents in environmental education: Mapping a complex and evolving pedagogical field. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE), 11–37.
The year 2022 commemorates three milestones in the history of environmental protection and education: It marks the 50th anniversary of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, organized in Stockholm in 1972; the 45th anniversary of the first Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, held in Tbilisi in 1977; and the 30th anniversary of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Each one of these meetings influenced the field of environmental education (EE) in the ensuing decades, and echoes of these meetings reverberate until the present.
2022年纪念着环境保护和教育历史上的三个重要里程碑：是1972年在斯德哥尔摩举行的联合国人类环境大会50周年；是1977年在第比利斯举行的首次政府间环境教育大会45周年；是1992年在里约热内卢举行的联合国环境与发展大会30周年。每次会议，都对随后几十年的环境教育（EE）领域产生了影响，这些影响一直持续至今。
A bird’s-eye view of landmark conferences
标志性会议的鸟瞰图
Whereas the Tbilisi conference was the first worldwide conference that addressed EE in all its forms — formal, non-formal, and informal — the 1972 Stockholm Conference set the initial impetus for its establishment among all nations, particularly Principle 19 and Recommendation 95. Principle 19 of the Stockholm Conference stated:
第比利斯会议是首次全球性会议，涵盖了EE的各种形式 — — 正规、非正规和非正式。1972年斯德哥尔摩大会为其在所有国家的建立设立了最初的动力，特别是第19条原则和第95号建议。斯德哥尔摩大会的第19条原则指出：
Education in environmental matters, for the younger generation as well as adults, giving due consideration to the underprivileged, is essential in order to broaden the basis for an enlightened opinion and responsible conduct by individuals, enterprises and communities in protecting and improving the environment in its full human dimension. (United Nations, 1973, p. 4)
为了让个人、企业和社区在所有人类的维度上保护和改善环境，形成开明观念和负责任行为，并扩大这些观念和行为所基于的基础，我们的关键是要为年轻一代和成年人提供在环境问题/事项中的教育，同时这种教育应当对处境不利的人给予应有的考虑。(United Nations, 1973, p. 4)
Principle 19 was followed by a specific plan of action, particularly Recommendation 95, which proposed teacher training in the field of EE, the elaboration and testing of new curricula, and pedagogical methods for all levels of EE (United Nations, 1973).
第19条原则后面跟着一个具体的行动计划，特别是第95号建议，提出在EE领域进行教师培训，细化和测试新课程以及各级EE的教育方法(United Nations, 1973)。
Five years later, during the Tbilisi Conference, representatives from 68 different countries put forth a set of principles and guidelines for EE at all levels — local, national, regional, and international — and for all age groups both inside and outside the formal school system. With this, two important things happened: Firstly, Tbilisi assured a narrative and discursive continuity to Stockholm in a historical context where social movements were flourishing, including the environmental movement; secondly, following the highly relevant conceptual work that came out of the Stockholm Conference, the representatives in Tbilisi set the bedrock for developing, implementing, and enacting EE concepts, policy and practice. According to the Tbilisi Declaration (UNESCO, 1977), the goals [sic] of EE were:
五年后，在第比利斯大会上，来自68个不同国家的代表提出了适用于各级别（地方、国家、区域和国际）、各年龄段（包括正规学校系统内外）的EE原则和指南。通过这一点，发生了两个重要的事情：首先，第比利斯在一个社会运动蓬勃发展的历史背景下，为斯德哥尔摩确保了叙事和话语的连续性；其次，在斯德哥尔摩大会产生的高度切题的概念工作之后，第比利斯的代表们为发展、实施和执行EE的概念、政策和实践奠定了基础。根据《第比利斯宣言》(UNESCO, 1977)，EE的总述目标是：
· to foster clear awareness of, and concern about, economic, social, political and ecological interdependence in urban and rural areas;
· to provide every person with opportunities to acquire the knowledge, values, attitudes, commitment and skills needed to protect and improve the environment;
· to create new patterns of behavior of individuals, groups and society as a whole toward the environment.
①在城市和乡村，培养对经济的、社会的、政治的和生态的相互关系的清晰觉知和关注；
②为每个人提供获得保护和改善环境所需的知识、价值观、态度、承诺和技能的机会；
③创造个人、团体和整个社会对环境的新行为模式。
Twenty years after Stockholm and 15 after Tbilisi, the Rio 1992 Conference harbored hopes and expectations with the presence of 172 countries, with more than 100 of them represented by their leaders. Rio 1992 culminated with a non-binding action plan, Agenda 21, which mentioned education throughout its 40 chapters, but one of them in particular was entirely devoted to promoting education, public awareness, and training, with a strong focus on sustainable development. Chapter 36 called for:
在斯德哥尔摩大会后的20年和第比利斯后的15年，里约1992大会充满希望和期望，共有172个国家参加，其中100多个国家由各自的领导人代表。里约1992大会以一个非约束性的行动计划，即《21世纪议程》告终，该议程在全部40章中都提到了教育，但其中一章尤其完全致力于促进教育、公众意识和培训，特别强调可持续发展。第36章呼吁：
· universal access to basic education, and to achieve primary education for at least 80 per cent of girls and 80 per cent of boys of primary school age through formal schooling or non-formal education and to reduce the adult illiteracy rate to at least half of its 1990 level. Efforts should focus on reducing the high illiteracy levels and redressing the lack of basic education among women and should bring their literacy levels into line with those of men. (United Nations, 1992)
· 普及基本教育，并通过正规教育或非正规教育实现至少80%的女孩和80%的男孩完成初等教育，以及将成年文盲率降低至1990年水平的一半。努力应集中在降低高文盲率水平和弥补妇女基础教育的不足，使她们的文盲率降到与男性的持平。(United Nations, 1992)
Notably, there have historically been strong criticisms of the shift from ‘environmental’ to ‘sustainability’ consolidated in the Rio 92 conference, following the 1987 Brundtland report, or Our Common Future, especially in educational settings. At the core of the critique is the focus of sustainability on economic growth, alongside the commodification of human relations and of nature; as much as economic growth does have a role in just environmental development, the (historically anchored) critical sense is that the profits mostly go to the local elites and first world business and government interests, an especially problematic structure and dynamic in the poor parts of the world. Curiously enough, this is the case in Brazil where the Rio 92 Conference was held, and where the ‘environmental’ field and discourse (education; policy; research; etc.) is vastly more developed than ‘sustainability’ or ‘sustainable development.’
值得注意的是，在1987年《布伦特兰报告》或《我们共同的未来》之后，在1992年里约会议上，特别是在教育环境中，对从“环境的”到“可持续性”的转变一直存在强烈的批评。批评的核心问题是可持续性关注的重点在于经济增长，伴随的是对人际关系和自然的商品化；正如经济增长在环境发展中发挥的那些作用一样，（历史上的）批判意识是，利润主要流向了当地精英和第一世界的商业和政府利益，这是一个有问题的结构和动力，尤其是在世界贫困地区。有趣的是，这种情况在举办里约1992大会的巴西尤为明显，而在这里，“环境的”领域和话语（教育、政策、研究等）比“可持续性”或“可持续发展”发展得多。
Another notable issue in the Rio 92 Conference was how the approach of specifying quantifiable, measurable objectives differed from previous declarations, certainly that of Tbilisi, but inevitably David Orr’s admonition comes to mind, regarding the importance of opening up the black box of education: “The conventional wisdom holds that all education is good, and the more of it one has, the better. The truth is that without significant precautions, education can equip people merely to be more effective vandals of the earth” (Orr, 1994, p. 6).
里约1992大会另一个引人注目的问题是，具体说明了采用的可量化与可衡量的目标与以前的宣言，当然是《第比利斯的宣言》，有何不同，但不可避免地使人想起David Orr关于打开教育黑箱的重要性做出的告诫：“传统智慧认为，所有教育都是好的，一个人接受的教育越多越好。事实是，如果没有重要的警觉，教育可能只会使人们更有效地破坏地球” (Orr, 1994, p. 6)。
More closely tied to education itself was the 1997 Tessaloniki Declaration, which sought to celebrate 20 years of Tbilisi and revisit its original commitments. In many ways, the Tessaloniki Declaration was still riding on the coattails of Rio 1992, and as such the concept of sustainable development greatly influenced the final declaration, so much so that the Tessaloniki Declaration was notorious for not mentioning EE. To be precise, EE was mentioned only twice, and one of those instances was the suggestion to replace the concept of EE for education for environment and sustainability (Knapp, 2000, p. 33). This was reflective of two parallel phenomena: (1) The rise of the sustainable development discourse that had become increasingly influential in educational policy circles worldwide; and (2) surveys at the time that showed the vast majority of teachers spent a minimum amount of time teaching about environmental issues (e.g., in the US, in the mid-1990s, the World Wildlife Fund estimated that 86% of teachers spent 1 hour or less on the environment each week, 1994).
与教育本身更密切相关的是1997年的《塞萨洛尼基宣言》，旨在庆祝第比利斯20周年并重新审视其最初的承诺。在许多方面，《塞萨洛尼基宣言》仍然依靠里约1992会议的成果，因此可持续发展的概念极大地影响了最终的宣言，以至于《塞萨洛尼基宣言》因几乎未提到EE而臭名昭著。确切地说，EE仅被提到两次，其中一次是建议将EE的概念替换成为了环境与可持续性的教育(Knapp, 2000, p. 33)。这反映了两个并行现象：（1）可持续发展话语的崛起，在全球教育政策圈越来越有影响力；（2）当时的调查显示，绝大多数教师只花了很少的时间教授环境问题（例如，在20世纪90年代中期的美国，世界野生动植物基金估计86%的教师每周只花费1小时或更少的时间讲授环境问题，1994）。
Starting in 2000, other landmark multilateral conferences, summits, and declarations have taken place (e.g., the United Nations Millennium Development Goals of 2000; the Johannesburg Declaration of 2002; the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, or Rio + 20; and the Sustainable Development Goals of 2015). Given the current malaise of the planet, both socially and environmentally, alongside the large number of international meetings and pronouncements of the last 50 years, it is quite easy to become cynical and bitter regarding how worthwhile they are. Eco-pessimism, environmental existential anxiety, and a profound sense of paralysis may, and have, enveloped certain groups worldwide. Nonetheless, it is vital to ask what role does environmental and sustainability research, praxis, and policy play in identifying the possibilities, breakthroughs, silences, absences, and limits of the various summits and declarations in the context of education.
从2000年开始，其他具有里程碑意义的多边会议、峰会和宣言相继举行（例如2000年联合国千年发展目标、2002年《约翰内斯堡宣言》、2012年联合国可持续发展大会或里约+20、2015年可持续发展目标）。鉴于当前社会和环境的困境萎靡，以及过去50年国际会议和声明的大量会议和宣言，领域很容易变得愤世嫉俗和愤怒，对它们有多少价值感到怀疑。生态悲观主义、环境存在焦虑和深刻的无力感，可能已经或正在笼罩全球某些群体。然而，关键是要问，在教育的脉络下，环境和可持续性研究、行动和政策，在识别各种峰会和宣言的潜力、突破、沉默、缺席和限制方面发挥了什么作用。
Connecting educational research, praxis, and policy to landmark conferences
将教育研究、行动和政策与标志性会议联系起来
A cursory look at newspapers around the world show how dreadful the state of the environment is today, which may lead to a sense of hopelessness for the planet’s future. While it is important to be realistic of the immense and varied challenges faced by the planet, EE by its very nature ought to offer a sense of hope and enjoyment precisely because the field seeks solutions to these difficult-to-solve problems. At JEE we suggest the embracement of a life-affirming educational philosophy that replaces fear, dread, and fatalism with courage, joy, justice, and empowerment. Below are a series of questions that offer a partial road map that could assist EE scholars in engaging in this life-affirming philosophy:
对世界各地报纸的粗略浏览表明，如今环境状况之差可谓令人堪忧，这可能导致对地球未来的绝望感。虽然对地球面临的巨大和多样化挑战保持现实态度非常重要，但EE出于其本质，应该提供一种希望和享受其中的感觉，正是因为这个领域寻求解决这些难以解决的问题。在JEE中，我们建议采用一种肯认生活/鼓舞人心的教育哲学，以勇气、欢乐、正义和赋权，取代恐惧、忧虑和宿命感。以下是一系列问题，提供了一份部分路线图，可以帮助EE学者参与到这种肯认生活/鼓舞人心的哲学中：
· To what extent is EE praxical, or just academic performative abstract theoretical textualism? (e.g., JEE 51(2), Rodrigues, 2020). How do we effectively close/bridge the gap between policy and action? What are some of the fundamental (preferably, simple) questions for a ‘practical theory’ of environmental justice? (e.g., JEE 52(5), Rodrigues & Lowan-Trudeau, 2021, asking “What is in it for Nature?”). One obvious point of departure is an exploration of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (a treaty that came into force in 1994), with gatherings organized annually through the COPs. At the COP26 of 2021, and for the first time, Ministers of Education and the Environment got together to pledge to integrate climate change into formal and non-formal education (UNESCO, 2021). Research can play a vital role in identifying strengths and weaknesses of this approach.
· EE在多大程度上是行动性的，还是仅仅是学术表现上的抽象理论性墨守成规主义？(e.g., JEE 51(2), Rodrigues, 2020)。我们如何有效地弥合政策和行动之间的差距？对于“环境正义”的“实践性理论”来说，有哪些基本的（最好是简明的）问题？（e.g., JEE 52(5), Rodrigues & Lowan-Trudeau, 2021，询问“这对大自然有什么好处？”）。一个明显的出发点是探讨联合国气候变化框架公约（1994年生效的一项条约）及其通过COPs组织的年度会议。在2021年的COP26会议上，教育和环境部长首次联合承诺将气候变化融入正规和非正规教育(UNESCO, 2021)。研究可以在识别这种方法的优点和不足方面发挥重要作用。
· Relatedly, how can we best integrate the concept of justice in international education when poorer nations that have contributed negligible amounts to fossil fuel emissions nonetheless suffer the brunt of climate change consequences? In 2022, Pakistan experienced its worst floods in recorded history: Two-thirds of the country’s districts have been damaged, at least 1,200 people died, and 33 million people were displaced (Mallapaty, 2022). Can educational and economic research, praxis, and policy intersect to ensure, for instance, more intense afforestation along the Indus River? After all, the historic floods in Pakistan in 2010 were a harbinger of what eventually became a reality 12 years later. Are the collective actions that respond to environmental issues (aesthetically-ethically-politically) aligned with the principles of justice historically claimed within social movements?
·相关地，当那些化石燃料排放贡献微不足道的较贫穷国家却遭受气候变化后果的冲击时，我们如何最好地将正义概念纳入国际教育？在2022年，巴基斯坦经历了有记录以来最严重的洪水：该国三分之二的地区受到了破坏，至少有1,200人死亡，3300万人流离失所(Mallapaty, 2022)。教育和经济研究、行动和政策是否能够交汇，以确保，例如在印度河沿岸地区进行更多高强度的植树造林，毕竟，巴基斯坦在2010年的历史性洪水，是12年后的这次洪水的前兆。响应环境问题的集体行动（审美地-伦理地-政治地）是否与社会运动中历史上宣称的正义原则相一致？
· How to connect the enactment of environmental laws and environmental politics with the field of education? For instance, one of the most exciting happenings in environmental law in the 21st century are the “rights of nature” provisions that confer legal rights to rivers, mountains, forests, and other ecosystems. Until recently, these rights were mostly symbolic, but in 2022 Ecuador’s High Court determined that the entity responsible for a project (i.e., a corporation or the State) must demonstrate that its activity is not harming fragile ecosystems or endangered species (Surma, 2022). Identifying the role that educational research can play in supporting and exploring rights of nature laws is vital.
·如何将环境法律的实施与环境政治跟教育领域联系起来？例如，21世纪环境法领域最令人兴奋的事件之一，是授予河流、山脉、森林和其他生态系统法律权利的“自然权利”规定。一直以来，这些权利大多是象征性的。但在2022年，厄瓜多尔高等法院裁定，负责项目的实体（即公司或国家）必须证明其活动不会危害脆弱的生态系统或濒危物种(Surma, 2022)。确定教育研究在支持和探讨自然权利法方面如何起作用，是至关重要的问题。
· Sustainability discourses continue to prioritize the economy over social and environmental concerns. In EE/EER, where, why, and when are such representations allowed to persist? ‘New’, ‘post’ […] theories seem to be dead ends, unless a decentering ecocentrism and praxis gets some performative traction within those abstractions (e.g., JEE SI 51(2), 2020). Theories that ought to play a much larger role in today’s debates — such as buen vivir, degrowth, and ecological swaraj (Kothari et al., 2014) — tend to be ignored or are placed at the margins of economistic policy debates, and even more so in educational circles.
·可持续性话语继续将经济置于社会和环境问题之上。在EE/EER领域，这种表现在哪、为什么以及何时可以允许存在？似乎“新的”、“后”[…]理论，似乎是死胡同，除非在这些抽象概念中，一种去中心化的生态中心主义和实践得到展演性的推动(e.g., JEE SI 51(2), 2020)。在今天的辩论中应该扮演更大角色的理论 — — 如buen vivir美好生活运动、去除增长和生态swaraj自·(Kothari et al., 2014) — — 往往被忽视或被置于经济政策辩论的边缘，甚至在教育圈内更是如此。
· What research evidence do we have, and where can it be found (in different geo-epistemologies), that can be used to defend experiential learning and education in the interdisciplinary framings of EE (or outdoor education, health education, sustainability education, etc.)? The pressures of capitalism in higher education are such that scholars are often forced to publish short-term empirical studies that advance little the field of EE (for an analysis of “academic capitalism,” see Slaughter & Rhoades, 2009). Academic journals often receive short-term empirical studies that last between one weekend to a couple of months, but seldom do they receive articles that last one year or longer to truly assess the longitudinal effects of experiential education in all its forms, and what can be done to improve it. One article that bucked the trend was Tal and Morag’s (2013) 8 year-long study of an elementary school EE program in Israel. While not all studies can last this long, the results from this and other longitudinal studies tend to be of such significance that they are well worth the effort and time.
·我们有哪些研究证据，以及在哪里能够（在不同的地理认识体系中）找到这些证据，可以用来在EE（或户外教育、健康教育、可持续教育等）的跨学科框架下捍卫体验式学习和教育？在高等教育中，资本主义的压力如此之大，以至于学者通常被迫发表短期的实证研究，对EE领域几乎没有推动作用（关于“学术资本主义”的分析，参见Slaughter & Rhoades, 2009）。学术期刊通常接收持续时间介于一个周末到几个月之间的短期实证研究，但很少接收持续时间长达一年或更长以真正评估各种形式的体验式教育的长期影响以及如何改进它的那些研究。打破这一趋势的一篇文章是Tal and Morag (2013)对以色列小学EE项目进行的8年研究。虽然并非所有研究都能持续这么长时间，但这和其他纵向研究的结果往往具有如此重要的意义，以至于值得付出努力和时间。
· Do we have solid, empirically based examples where the agency of the non-human changed EE and EER? Are there potential ecopedagogical drives in social change brought forth by non-human agencies? One positive result from these conferences was the Convention of Biological Diversity of 1993. Given the continuous loss of species worldwide, one could focus on actual or potential success stories and how education played — or could play — an important role. In 2022, India reintroduced the cheetah, 50 years after becoming extinct in that country (Biswas, 2022). This reintroduction represents the first time a large carnivore is being moved from one continent to another and being reintroduced in the wild. It is too early to determine how successful this reintroduction will be, but it is clear that a parallel education campaign to teach regional populations of the importance of this effort, in addition to strong accountability and law enforcement, is vital to ensure its success.
·我们是否有坚实的、基于实证的例子，表明非人类的主动性如何改变了EE和EER？非人类主体是否在社会变革中引发了潜在的生态教育动力？这些会议的一个积极结果是1993年《生物多样性公约》。鉴于全球物种不断丧失，我们可以关注实际或潜在的成功案例以及教育如何发挥或可能发挥重要作用。在2022年，在该国灭绝50年后，印度重新引入了猎豹(Biswas, 2022)。这次重新引入代表着首次将大型食肉动物从一个大陆移动到另一个大陆并重新引入野外。现在还太早确定这次重新引入会取得多大的成功，但显然，除了强有力的问责制和执法外，还需要并行的教育宣传活动教育地区人口这一努力的重要性，这对其成功至关重要。
Amnesia and silences…
遗忘和沉默…
In JEE’s 2020 special issue on global politics of knowledge production in EER: ‘New’ theory and North-South representations (Rodrigues, 2020), Phillip Payne critiqued the “amnesia of the moment” in EE (research) highlighting how founding policies of EE and its implied pedagogical praxis and commensurable methodological development in EE research have given place to an ahistorical and atheoretical mash of performatively-driven abstract theorizing (Payne, 2020). The questions and examples presented in this editorial paper are aimed as a provocative call which we hope will be heeded by fellow EE researchers and practitioners: We need more memory and retrospective empirical studies in EE research about the core of EE―How does the field praxically respond to the recommendations, principles, and policies from half a century of landmark conferences? In the narrative continuity of each of these landmarks, what changed, what was reenforced (and possibly re-worded), what were/are the remaining silences?
在JEE关于EE研究的全球知识生产的2020年特刊中，“新”理论与南北代表(Rodrigues, 2020)，Phillip Payne批评了EE（研究）中的“一时失忆”，强调EE的创始政策及其隐含的教育行动和EE研究中类似方向的方法发展，是如何让位于由表现力驱动的抽象理论化的非历史和非理论混合体的(Payne, 2020)。本社论文章中提出的问题和例子，旨在激发EE研究人员和实务工作者的注意：在EE研究中，我们需要更多关于EE核心的记忆和回顾性实证研究 — — 该领域如何行动应对半个世纪里标志性会议的建议、原则和政策？在每个里程碑事件的连续性叙事中，有哪些变化，有什么得到了强化（可能是重新措辞），有哪些问题曾经或现在一直在沉默？
While we are at it, why not extend the call to organizations such as the NAAEE, forums like the WEEC, and journals like JEE? How have they historically dealt with policy-action gaps and contradictions? If we do acknowledge the tendency to an “amnesia of the moment,” are these organizations, forums, and scientific publication streams part of the problem of mainstreaming EE and EE research inaction against the promise and potential of Tbilisi? Or can they be part of the solution as critical histories of EE and EE research, including and beyond UN gatherings?
既然说到这里了，为什么不将呼吁扩展到组织，比如NAAEE、类似WEEC的论坛，以及像是JEE这样的期刊呢？它们在历史上是如何处理政策行动差距和矛盾的？如果我们承认“一时失忆”的倾向，那么在主流EE和EE研究不作为而与第比利斯的承诺和潜力相违背的这个问题中，这些组织、论坛和科学出版通道是否是问题的一部分？还是它们能够成为解决方案的一部分，作为EE和EE研究的关键历史，包括并超越联合国会议?
Following this editorial paper, the readers of JEE will find Phillip Payne’s Tbilisi’s “sounds of silence” — (in)action in the policy ≠ embodiments of environmental education as a critical response to our call. Our hope is that Payne’s article will be the first of many responses, and that the collective memory-work of how different organizations (be it through events, documents, publications, etc.), past and present, address or not policy-action, or theory-practice gaps, to serve as guidance and inspiration to a more praxical EE.
在这篇社论之后，JEE的读者将找到Phillip Payne的《第比利斯的“沉默之声” — — 政策的（不）行动≠环境教育的体现》文章，作为对我们的呼吁的重要回应。我们希望Payne的文章将是众多回应的第一篇，希望关于“不同组织（通过活动、文件、出版物等方式）如何处理或不处理政策行动、理论实践差距”的集体记忆工作，无论着眼过去还是当前状况，能够作为更加行动性的EE的指导和灵感。
