REC - EMTC: Insight 1/2: Environmental training in CEE

M A I L B O X

Is environmental training in CEE and EMTC Network the same?

To inaugurate our mailbox, here is a response to the editorial and cover article of the first issue of Insight (Summer 1996), by Martina Vagacova from the Environmental Training Project (ETP) International and Boris Strecansky from ETP Slovakia Foundation. Miroslav Chodak, project manager of EMTC Network replies.
Letters to the editor should be sent to: Florence Gallez - Insight, The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Ady endre ut 9-11, 2000 Szentendre, Hungary. Fax: (36-26) 311-294, E-mail: fgallez@rec.org.

Letters must include the writer's full name, address and telephone, and may be edited for space.

Dear Miro,

First, let us congratulate you on the birth of Insight and state our appreciation for the fact that it is here. We believe it is a necessary and timely effort which may assist in building indigenous capacity in environmental training in CEE. Since our group has operated in the area of environmental management training for several years - last year through funding of USAID (United States Agency for International Development) - the ETP (Environmental Training Project for Central and Eastern Europe) delivered 71 trainings in 116 offerings of which 38 trainings were delivered by local trainers. These trainings reached 2,378 participants in the six CEE countries (Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland) - we would like to comment on the first issue of Insight and specifically address the issue of environmental training in CEE and the issue to whom Insight is dedicated. The basis of our response was the editorial and cover article.

Generalizations? Why not, but with more analysis and evidence

We understand that your intention in the cover article was to provoke a discussion about the quality of environmental training in CEE and we agree that it is necessary to talk about it. We liked the deep analysis of theories and approaches in modern environmental training. However, in many statements we felt a lack of analysis of "who and what are actually here" in terms of environmental training in CEE. Before making statements such as "...environmental training in CEE operates on sandy foundations..." or "...we haven't done a good job of providing the kind of evaluation of training that our clients seek..." etc. a little survey should be made, which would reveal various providers of environmental training, each with different quality and approach. Some performing better, some terribly, some excellently. To put it simply - for the number of generalizations in the article, we miss empirical evidence or background reference. This should not mean that they are not correct. But they do not cover the whole picture, and less oriented readers may think that the situation is very bad. We think that with such approach your hope in the editorial cannot ever be fulfilled. (...to provide a real insight into what's happening in environmental training in CEE...). We suggest that you provide real-life examples of who has done what, what has worked and how it has worked in different circumstances in environmental training. Such comparative analysis and conclusions coming out of it would definitely be more productive than mystifying the readers.

Who is Insight for?

For Insight to become a real newsletter for environmental training professionals in CEE it needs to be balanced. The whole first issue was heavily focused on the EMTC Network. We understand its relationship and there is nothing bad about the coverage, but for the aim of the journal to be fulfilled, i.e. to be really recognized, respected and valued by various professionals (heading is: "Insight for environmental training professionals in CEE"), it needs to reflect the situation as objectively as possible. The first issue of Insight showed who the father and mother are but only very little who the whole family is and how big it is (or it might be, because there is always some distant relative who is rarely known).

Improper identification

It is not clear who is that "we" in the editorial notes and article. On the one hand it subsumes all environmental training in CEE, on the other, some sentences clearly stated that "we" means only EMTCs. If Insight is to become what it declares it wants to be, it needs to open itself and be a medium which will voice out messages, news and opinions on environmental training in a balanced and sober way. We believe there is a number of institutions and individuals in the CEE involved in environmental training and we think that Insight should be aware of them. A way of showing awareness is to offer them to participate in running the journal not only through contributing articles, but also in the form of membership in the editorial board and making, planning, discussing the journal together.

Insight has the potential to acquire the profile of a publication which will become widespread and widely read among environmental training professionals in CEE. The first issue has shown a lot of interesting information, especially the analysis of training methodology. On the other hand it missed some other potentials and issues addressed above. But it is still too early to say what Insight will truly become. However, without opening its institutional scope it will remain an "insight" looking at itself. We believe it is not what Insight aspires to be.

Sincerely,
Martina Vagacova
Boris Strecansky
ETP Slovakia foundation

Insight responds

Dear Martina and Boris,

First, I must thank you for your judicious and critical appreciation of our first issue, which prove a constructive, excellent contribution. Moreover, I completely agree with all the points you raise. Secondly, I would like to congratulate you on your achievements so far, namely your extensive and successful delivery of trainings.

The question of identification is certainly essential. Generally, "we" stands for the environmental training community in Central and Eastern Europe. However, in many cases our own experience comes from the EMTC Network. It is true, our main purpose in the cover article was to spark discussion. Therefore this article was not meant to be a final word about environmental training or a comprehensive analysis of the situation, but more modestly, the beginning of a thought-provoking dialogue which aims at improving environmental training. This accounts for the lack of thorough analysis of the key actors in environmental training in CEE.

Similarly, I recognize the importance of representing all views and sides from a completely impartial standpoint. Real-life examples of past actions, as you suggest, would be an excellent means of doing this, and ideally, they should come from the readership. But the information of this cover story is based on my own experience of the field and therefore cannot be all inclusive. Perhaps this should have been stated in the article itself so as to avoid a one-sided approach. Nevertheless, objectivity and openness are our key priorities for Insight, which I hope will help build a varied, active readership.

I thank you once more for your letter and I hope that it will encourage other readers to send their responses.

Yours sincerely,
Miroslav Chodak.
EMTC Network Project Manager

REC * EMTC * PUBLICATIONS * INSIGHT * AUTUMN 1996