Early childhood teachers in Norway foster respect for the environment but do not address the social and economic dimensions of sustainable development

Early childhood education for sustainable development (SD) in Norway is supported by a Norwegian government statement indicating that SD and sustainability should be promoted at all levels of education. Sustainable development is also considered to be a central value of ECEC (early childhood education and care) institutions in Norway. This study investigated how ECEC institutions in Norway express sustainable development in their annual plans, which are documents developed by teachers indicating how they intend to implement the formal curriculum.

Thirty ECEC annual plans developed for 2019–2020 were accessed from the internet and analyzed in relation to the research question, “How do ECEC institutions express sustainable development in annual plans?” The process of analysis included the extraction of text segments regarding SD and categorizing concepts according to different themes. The process also included comparing document references to SD to the environmental, social, and economic dimensions of SD.

Eighteen of the annual plans had no representations of sustainable development. Three referenced the term but without explanation or elaboration. The other plans varied in how SD was expressed. “Curriculum segments” was one of the prominent themes; yet information about how these segments might be operationalized into pedagogical practice was lacking. “Take care of the environment and nature” – another frequent theme – was expanded to focus on taking care of self and others. This expanded theme includes reference to life skills, health, social belonging, and love of nature and may touch on the social dimension of SD. “Analyses show that a social dimension of SD is emphasised when the annual plans point out that if children take care of themselves and others, they will be capable of taking care of the environment and nature.” Some of the annual plans addressed the environmental dimension of SD by connecting “taking care of the environment and nature” to such practices as “recycling, sorting, and picking up garbage.” The economic dimension of SD was reflected in a few of the annual plan documents by noting how newspapers, glass, and plastic toys can be made into new things and encouraging such practices as reducing water and soap volume when washing hands, turning off lights, and composting organic waste. Such practices are “considered a strategy to raise consciousness among children.” Generally, however, the economic and social dimensions of SD were not included in the annual plans. Also missing from most of the annual plans were “any explanatory guidelines for how to promote SD within and outside the kindergarten grounds beyond general considerations.” Additional themes focused on specific ecological topics such as plants, insects, animals, food, and food production.

The findings of this study reflect a presumption supported by some scholars who believe that, if children are given the opportunity to spend time outdoors, they will develop a future interest in sustainability issues. Other scholars, however, disagree and believe that teachers of young children need to be more explicit in helping young children learn about sustainable development. This study found “a gap between the intentions expressed in the annual plans and the pedagogical reality; that is, between the ECEC institutions’ intentions with SD and their ability to take action to achieve these intentions.”