The problem with consensus: The contested terrain of sustainability in a university setting

When environmental ethics and sustainability are discussed in many teaching contexts there are explicit or implicit assumptions that it is essential or at least desirable to reach consensus. This is based on a belief that there is (or should be) a shared understanding about what environmental ethics and sustainability is and how it should be enacted in the world. However, in this paper we argue that this desire for consensus and agreement leads to the imposition of a particular moral and ethical agenda based on defining 'right' and 'wrong' behaviours and ideas. Values, life experiences and concerns about sustainability and environmental ethics are lost in the quest for a common, shared vision which potentially has more to do with the teacher imposing a particular viewpoint than with the student. This effectively closes down debate and inhibits student's potential for transformative learning experiences. In this paper we will present case studies of three courses offered in the School of Architecture & Design, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. While different in content and in focus each are premised on an ethic of valuing debate, discussion and often contest along with a respect for different points of view. We argue that contestation, debate and divergent opinions should be actively encouraged to create a learning environment that values differences rather than seeks similarities. This sets up the circumstances not only for potential transformations in individual thinking but importantly an ethic of openness to diverse points of view and experiences. Such an approach also has the potential to transform sustainability discourse from one characterized by messages of constraint and imposition - or of simply saying 'no' - to one of openness to innovation and change.