80
also emphasise the need for in-depth environmental scientific knowledge and understanding so that sustainable solutions are provided. It should also highlight the
inherent diverse nature of the environment and its different aspects in every scientific and social field. The knowledge gained should assist in the application of environmental ethics in every human activity. Physical boundaries should not inhibit the
application of environmentology but rather enhance its implementation in everyday
life in order to preserve natural and cultural heritage for the future generations.
Acknowledgement This chapter is based on work from Cost Action ENEC – European Network
for Environmental Citizenship (CA16229) – supported by COST (European Cooperation in
Science and Technology).
References
Awan, U., Abbasi, A. S., & Humayon, A. A. (2014). The concept of civic sustainability is need of
hour. Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 6(6), 347–352.
Barry, J. (2006). Resistance is fertile: From environmental to sustainability citizenship. In
A. Dobson & D. Bell (Eds.), Environmental citizenship (pp. 21–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Berkowitz, A. R., Ford, M. E., & Brewer, C. A. (2005). Framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy, and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In E. Johnson
& M. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy, changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 227–266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bodorkós, B., Mihók, B., Bela G. & Gálhidy L. (2005). Local people and the changes of local
environment in the south-Borsod region. Conference of the ESRS. Book of abstracts, 21.
Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2018). Eco-school evaluation beyond labels: The impact
of environmental policy, didactics and nature at school on student outcomes. Environmental
Education Research, 24(9), 1250–1267.
Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (2004). Outdoor ecology education and pupils’ environmental perception in preservation and utilization. Science Education International, 15(1), 27–48.
Boström, M. (2012). A missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: Introduction to the special issue. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 8(1), 3–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2012.11908080.
Brosius, J. P. (2006). What counts as local knowledge in global environmental assessments and
conventions? In W. Reid, F. Berkes, D. Capistrano, & T. Wilbanks (Eds.), Bridging scales
and knowledge systems: Concept and applications in ecosystem assessment (pp. 129–144).
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Bruckmeier, K. (2004). CORASON – Framework for the analysis of rural sustainable development. http://www.corason.hu
Bruckmeier, K., & Tovey, H. (2008). Knowledge, power and sustainability in contemporary rural
Europe. Journal Compilation European Society for Rural Sociology, Sociologia Ruralis, 48(3),
313–329.
Cao, B. (2015). Environment and citizenship. London: Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9780203084335.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources of proenvironmental sensitivity. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29(3), 11–21.
Csurgó, B., Kovách, I., & Kučerová, E. (2008). Knowledge, power and sustainability in contemporary rural Europe. Journal compilation European Society for Rural Sociology, Sociologia
Ruralis, 48(3), 292–312.
Dean, H. (2001). Green citizenship. Social Policy and Administration, 35(3), 490–505.
M. Smederevac-Lalic et al.
also emphasise the need for in-depth environmental scientific knowledge and understanding so that sustainable solutions are provided. It should also highlight the
inherent diverse nature of the environment and its different aspects in every scientific and social field. The knowledge gained should assist in the application of environmental ethics in every human activity. Physical boundaries should not inhibit the
application of environmentology but rather enhance its implementation in everyday
life in order to preserve natural and cultural heritage for the future generations.
Acknowledgement This chapter is based on work from Cost Action ENEC – European Network
for Environmental Citizenship (CA16229) – supported by COST (European Cooperation in
Science and Technology).
References
Awan, U., Abbasi, A. S., & Humayon, A. A. (2014). The concept of civic sustainability is need of
hour. Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 6(6), 347–352.
Barry, J. (2006). Resistance is fertile: From environmental to sustainability citizenship. In
A. Dobson & D. Bell (Eds.), Environmental citizenship (pp. 21–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Berkowitz, A. R., Ford, M. E., & Brewer, C. A. (2005). Framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy, and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In E. Johnson
& M. Mappin (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy, changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 227–266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bodorkós, B., Mihók, B., Bela G. & Gálhidy L. (2005). Local people and the changes of local
environment in the south-Borsod region. Conference of the ESRS. Book of abstracts, 21.
Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2018). Eco-school evaluation beyond labels: The impact
of environmental policy, didactics and nature at school on student outcomes. Environmental
Education Research, 24(9), 1250–1267.
Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (2004). Outdoor ecology education and pupils’ environmental perception in preservation and utilization. Science Education International, 15(1), 27–48.
Boström, M. (2012). A missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: Introduction to the special issue. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 8(1), 3–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2012.11908080.
Brosius, J. P. (2006). What counts as local knowledge in global environmental assessments and
conventions? In W. Reid, F. Berkes, D. Capistrano, & T. Wilbanks (Eds.), Bridging scales
and knowledge systems: Concept and applications in ecosystem assessment (pp. 129–144).
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Bruckmeier, K. (2004). CORASON – Framework for the analysis of rural sustainable development. http://www.corason.hu
Bruckmeier, K., & Tovey, H. (2008). Knowledge, power and sustainability in contemporary rural
Europe. Journal Compilation European Society for Rural Sociology, Sociologia Ruralis, 48(3),
313–329.
Cao, B. (2015). Environment and citizenship. London: Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9780203084335.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources of proenvironmental sensitivity. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29(3), 11–21.
Csurgó, B., Kovách, I., & Kučerová, E. (2008). Knowledge, power and sustainability in contemporary rural Europe. Journal compilation European Society for Rural Sociology, Sociologia
Ruralis, 48(3), 292–312.
Dean, H. (2001). Green citizenship. Social Policy and Administration, 35(3), 490–505.
M. Smederevac-Lalic et al.