82
was established in line with the Japanese government’s initiative to promote
sustainability education in higher education institutions and to nurture environmental leaders. Since the concept of sustainability and present-day environmental problems are featured by the complexity of issues, APIEL has paid
considerable attention to trans- disciplinary and/or cross-disciplinary education.
In particular, APIEL focuses on fostering student leadership through on-site curriculum development.
At the core of the on-site curriculum, there is a course entitled as “Field
Exercise” built for the purpose of practical learning. To guarantee the diversity of
education methodologies and educational effects, APIEL’s fi eld exercise units can
be roughly classifi ed as either fi eld-oriented or structure-oriented. In either case,
the course consists roughly of four parts: preliminary learning; on-site learning;
after-the-fact learning; and joint tasks (report preparation and presentations).
Field-oriented exercises develop environmental leadership through group-based
work led by students that relates to preliminary studies, planning of research activities in the fi eld, implementation of fi eld surveys, and the completion of solution
proposals. Akiyama et al. [ 1 ] mentioned that, fi eld-oriented exercise fosters environmental leadership mainly through the execution of fi eld surveys, while the
structure- oriented exercise fosters environmental leadership mainly through a
series of educator-structured programs (i.e., in-class lectures, discussions, and
short fi eld trips).
This chapter will provide a detailed description of one of the fi eld-oriented
exercises, the Oasis Unit, which has been conducted in the Heihe River basin in
arid northwestern China. The Oasis Unit especially emphasizes on the multiplicity of sustainability education and necessity for a holistic view to understand the
various dimensions of environmental issues. The unit, therefore, makes the effort
to apply the Integral Approach proposed by the American philosopher Ken Wilber
into the practice of environmental leadership education. In this chapter, we provide an introduction to this approach, followed by its benefi ts for integrating academic disciplines, as well as the organizational resources and the perspectives of
stakeholders used for fi nding solutions to environmental issues. This chapter concludes by i dentifying future challenges of fi eld-oriented environmental leadership
education.
5.2 Integral Approach: A Simplifi ed Introduction
The Integral Approach aims to incorporate multiple perspectives from around the
world instead of focusing on specifi c objects and/or specifi c systems of objects.
Given the complexity of reality, the Integral Approach cuts across fi elds and
brings together existing methodologies into a trans-/cross-disciplinary framework. According to Wilber [ 2 , 3 ] all phenomena in the world can be categorized
into four groups using a four quadrant framework. These quadrants are four ways
of viewing the same occurrence in the reality from four different perspectives.
T. Akiyama and J. Li
was established in line with the Japanese government’s initiative to promote
sustainability education in higher education institutions and to nurture environmental leaders. Since the concept of sustainability and present-day environmental problems are featured by the complexity of issues, APIEL has paid
considerable attention to trans- disciplinary and/or cross-disciplinary education.
In particular, APIEL focuses on fostering student leadership through on-site curriculum development.
At the core of the on-site curriculum, there is a course entitled as “Field
Exercise” built for the purpose of practical learning. To guarantee the diversity of
education methodologies and educational effects, APIEL’s fi eld exercise units can
be roughly classifi ed as either fi eld-oriented or structure-oriented. In either case,
the course consists roughly of four parts: preliminary learning; on-site learning;
after-the-fact learning; and joint tasks (report preparation and presentations).
Field-oriented exercises develop environmental leadership through group-based
work led by students that relates to preliminary studies, planning of research activities in the fi eld, implementation of fi eld surveys, and the completion of solution
proposals. Akiyama et al. [ 1 ] mentioned that, fi eld-oriented exercise fosters environmental leadership mainly through the execution of fi eld surveys, while the
structure- oriented exercise fosters environmental leadership mainly through a
series of educator-structured programs (i.e., in-class lectures, discussions, and
short fi eld trips).
This chapter will provide a detailed description of one of the fi eld-oriented
exercises, the Oasis Unit, which has been conducted in the Heihe River basin in
arid northwestern China. The Oasis Unit especially emphasizes on the multiplicity of sustainability education and necessity for a holistic view to understand the
various dimensions of environmental issues. The unit, therefore, makes the effort
to apply the Integral Approach proposed by the American philosopher Ken Wilber
into the practice of environmental leadership education. In this chapter, we provide an introduction to this approach, followed by its benefi ts for integrating academic disciplines, as well as the organizational resources and the perspectives of
stakeholders used for fi nding solutions to environmental issues. This chapter concludes by i dentifying future challenges of fi eld-oriented environmental leadership
education.
5.2 Integral Approach: A Simplifi ed Introduction
The Integral Approach aims to incorporate multiple perspectives from around the
world instead of focusing on specifi c objects and/or specifi c systems of objects.
Given the complexity of reality, the Integral Approach cuts across fi elds and
brings together existing methodologies into a trans-/cross-disciplinary framework. According to Wilber [ 2 , 3 ] all phenomena in the world can be categorized
into four groups using a four quadrant framework. These quadrants are four ways
of viewing the same occurrence in the reality from four different perspectives.
T. Akiyama and J. Li