Search results

Scholars working in the field of the economics of education have long documented how investment in girls’ education delivers the greatest return in terms of societal wellbeing (see, e.g., Dollar & Gatti, 1999; Forbes, 2000; Klasen, 2002). Unfortunately, mainstream economists have quite a narrow interpretation of wellbeing, the rate of growth in gross domestic product (GDP) usually serves as the main barometer. The problem here is that higher rates of economic growth do not necessarily imply improved outcomes in terms of gender equality. Getting girls in school certainly represents progress. There are 129 million girls around the world who are not in school (UNICEF, 2022), and there are numerous obstacles to overcome if this problem is to be seriously addressed. The good news is that far more attention is being devoted to girls’ education and the empowerment of women today than in the past, as countless NGOs and charities have sprung up in recent years that focus on these issues. A key question, however, is whether it is sufficient just to get girls to attend school. Less attention seems to be paid to what they actually do when they get there. Admittedly, some education is better than none at all, but what if girls attended schools where the measure of success was less focussed on exam results, getting a good job, and growing GDP? In this chapter, we present the case for school education that aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Green School for Girls (GS4G) – a pilot programme – seeks to implement a curriculum and pedagogy that will produce strong, independently minded, entrepreneurial young women, capable of earning a good living for themselves and their families in a fashion that is in harmony with the interests of the community and the natural environment.

While climate change mitigation policies are indispensable for addressing global environmental crises, the chapter prompts that their implementation should account for the intricate tapestry of territorial identities. The solution lies in a balanced approach that harmonizes emission reduction targets with the preservation of cultural heritage and local customs. The chapter concludes by warning against top-down imposition of policies, as this could jeopardize community autonomy and engender mistrust. Given the delicate balance between climate concerns and cultural preservation, a path forward emerges, that upholds the integrity of desirable territorial development.