Discussion of environmental communication is a valuable reminder of the environmental goals that we (who are concerned enough to be reading this journal) have for society and our planet. In this context, Environmental Communication Pedagogy and Practice, by Milstein, Pileggi, and Morgan, makes a timely contribution to environmental activity and our understanding of engaging with communities to promote environmental behaviour.

This edited volume has 28 chapters, covering a considerable spread of issues; these are contributed by North American academics and PhD students, with a small representation of community and professional communicators. The chapters are grouped into four parts: (Re)conceptualising the environmental communication classroom, Diverse practices in teaching environmental communications, Transformative practice —nurturing change agents, and Environmental communication pedagogy and practice toolbox. Apparent from these titles is that over the 28 chapters there is considerable discussion of the broad background and theory associated with environmental communication, along with the experiences and practice of those who have been engaged in the communication. As a result, the volume constitutes a resource akin to a textbook for environmental communication, the difference being that here the reader is left to integrate the threads of theory and practice, which appear to differing degrees in most chapters, and to assess the relative value of the information and experience presented by each author.

A particular issue for the reader is likely to be sorting out the purpose of environmental communication. Some chapters suggest the purpose is simply to communicate about the environment (i.e., provide information about environmental conditions and/or issues). Others combine introduction to environmental issues by undertaking some exercise in the environment (i.e., investigation of a current, or topical, issue possibly for some organisation). Then others tend to assume a level of environmental literacy (i.e., about the environment), but focus the engagement exercise on a current issue, with the intent of bringing about some awareness or behaviour change, for the environment. This divergence of purpose is similar to the debates that took place just prior to the 21st century regarding the purpose of environmental education (EE; i.e., was EE only about the environment, or was learning about the environment also to be done in the environment, or was EE also to develop actions for the environment). For readers who were part of those discussions, or have been involved in the early discussions around education for sustainable development, the material covered in several chapters will seem somewhat repetitive.

However, for those new to the environmental field, the literature and experiences contained in these chapters will provide valuable context for their pedagogy and thinking about the goals of their teaching. Of particular use is likely to be the historical context of the environment movement and the related philosophy, touched on in some chapters, especially those in the first and second parts. Unfortunately, the contributors generally do not seem to show any recognition of the earlier environmental communication ‘movements’ (such as Acclimatisation and Earth Education, both of which developed in North America), which practised many of the pedagogical directions discussed in some chapters.

While some chapters in Part 1 touch on instances of environmental communication, many in the other parts either refer to examples, or are based on experiences of communication. The vast majority of these relate to case studies across schools, tertiary education, and community. Being case studies, the experiences they describe are not necessarily translatable to other situations (e.g., in Australia). Case studies also suffer the challenge of convincing those who have been inculcated in the objective research approaches of the sciences, that the understanding gained can provide valid insights.

The challenge for environmental communication, apparently not recognised by any contributor, is that if the good ideas they present are to be implemented by more than themselves, then much more thought and effort will be needed to make the ideas non-threatening to other disciplines, and be communicated in ways that will encourage their take-up. Making the communication approaches mainstream rather than ‘niche’ is similar to showing how qualitative and qualitative research methods can contribute to overall understanding, and perhaps enlightenment. Unless this challenge can be resolved, those in the sciences and technology fields are likely to continue to ignore environmental communication. This would be to the detriment of their students, and to the planet.

The case studies provide a very wide range of experiences and examples of communication techniques, including: walks in the environment, assessing individual consumption, writing blogs, delivering speeches, analysing written material, developing visual materials, exercising a problem focus, creating an individual moral vision statement, exercising empathy, and student reflection. Overall, these outline a wealth of ideas for those developing environmental communication activities, and while some are constrained to considering only the content and topics of an activity, others, notably in Part 3 (Transformative practice — nurturing change agents), draw more attention to the pedagogy and engagement of students.

However, the big disappointment is that it is rare to see reported any evaluation of a communication activity. As a result, in most cases I am left wondering:

• • What have the students/participants learned as a consequence of the activity; what can they take into their personal and professional/work lives?

• • How effective has the activity been in achieving the (often unclear) objectives of the activity; would any changes in pedagogy be appropriate; what are the reflections of the individual participants, peers, and organisation or community where they have been involved?

• • What skills and capabilities were to be developed from the activity, and were they developed by the students/participants?

I acknowledge that this is asking a lot, and perhaps unfairly, from contributors reporting their experiences. However, if others reading these contributions are to engage with environmental communication for the betterment of our environment, then we need to have a good idea of what are effective approaches.