Development Education in Canada, Then and Now

Francois Legault

Few things in life are certain, but we can be quite sure that when the year 2000 dawns, Canadians will be living in a smaller, more crowded, more interdependent world . . . a Global Village where what happens on another continent happens next door, and affects our lives. . . All of this means that Canadians . . . need a much higher level of global awareness and understanding than we have had in the past.
-- (excerpt of a statement made in 1991 by Monique Landry, then Canadian Minister for External Relations and International Development).

In the early 1990s, I remember attending a North American conference on development education at which U.S. development educators looked with envy on their Canadian counterparts who were getting much more funding in relative terms.  In my work as Executive Secretary of the National Advisory Committee on Development Education in Canada at that time, it was encouraging to hear that the effort at raising awareness of the Canadian population on international development issues was receiving support that was envied south of the border.

Our development education committee had been created in 1989 by the Minister of External Relations and International Development to study the current situation of development education in Canada and to make recommendations on how to improve it.  The committee was chaired by ex-Federal Member of Parliament and ex-Canadian Ambassador for Disarmament at the United Nations Douglas Roche and counted 10 other members coming from different sectors of Canadian society as well as various parts of the country.  The committee undertook extensive consultations all across Canada with the development education community and other interested constituencies and specialists.

In its preliminary report, entitled "We Journey Together," the committee defined development education as "a process aimed at developing Canadians' understanding of major world changes and thus the importance of global interdependence and commitment to responsible, sustainable world development."  Focusing particularly on the state of development education in the country, the report's general conclusion was that a valuable effort was underway, in significant part with support from Government funds and programs, but that much more remained to be done in view of the considerable global challenges appearing on the horizon.

Forms of Support

While not all development education activity in Canada existed because of the Government's financial and other support for it, this contribution of the Government through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) had a major impact.  The CIDA support that existed in the early 1990s, principally through its Public Participation Program (PPP), took the following forms.

First, financial support was being provided to a large number of Canadian non-governmental organizations undertaking development education activities at all levels-- national, provincial, and local.  Some organizations were concurrently direct implementers or supporters of projects overseas (such as Oxfam-Canada, Save the Children-Canada, etc.) while others were strictly created for, or specialized in, development education (chapters of the YM-YWCA, Inter-Church Committees, etc.).  Some had ties to religious groups and churches while others were of a more secular nature, such as solidarity groups with specific regions, countries and peoples of the world. Some were individual organizations while others were coordinating bodies or umbrella organizations, such as provincial Councils for International Cooperation.  In fact, CIDA was developing valuable collaboration with such provincial entities to become intermediaries in the disbursement of funds for development education activities in many provinces in order to be more attentive and responsive to specific regional realities, preoccupations, and priorities.

In primary and secondary school education, the new Global Education Program aimed at having effective programs functioning in all provinces and territories within a few years, working with and through the provincial teachers federation, was being funded.  In 1990, programs were already being implemented in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

In higher education, there was financial support for International Centers in universities across the country and their development education endeavors.

There was also support for Learner Centers (International Development Education Resource Association in Vancouver, Edmonton Learner Center, One Sky in Saskatchewan, etc.) and other similar organizations (Newfoundland Peace Center, Development Education Resources and Information Center in Halifax, etc.) making development education resources and activities available in communities around the country.

Some University International Centers and community Learner Centers also benefited from a new program that supported their efforts to become Centers of Excellence in a specialized area of development education, such as environmental education or health issues.

Additional support was also provided to other types of organizations in Canadian society, such as professional associations, unions, research organizations and private foundations to develop development education programs.

An International Development Day had been established in 1988 to take place in October each year.

Increased Dev Ed Funding?

Nevertheless, while the activities above were taking place and receiving support, and Canadians were being envied across the border because of that, the Committee concluded that the support for development education needed to be increased.

Consequently, in its next report, entitled "Towards a Global Future," the committee recommended that, even though the Government's stated objective of devoting 1 percent of the Official Development Assistance (ODA) budget to public outreach in the financial year 1991-92 was appreciable, the target for public outreach should be raised to 1.5 percent of ODA in incremental stages by 1996-97.

"Towards a Global Future" made a number of other recommendations about how to better reach some key target audiences-- specifically, the media, the business sector and politicians-- and how to ensure a successful implementation of the Global Education Program.  The report also recommended that International Development Day be transformed into a full International Development Week and be moved form October to early February to give more time for educators to prepare their students in the first part of the year for more meaningful participation in the activities of such a week.

A Rude Awakening

Fast forward to the present and it is immediately clear that the committee’s recommendation was not enacted.  To the contrary, a few years afterward, the budget for development education at CIDA was radically cut and the Public Participation Program (PPC) was abolished.  (The Committee itself had not survived the year 1992).  Any remaining activity was integrated (and drowned) within other CIDA departments.  It appears that this evolution (or devolution) closely paralleled a similar process in the United States.  However, in view of the fact that much less alternative funding, such as private foundations, is available to support such types of activities in Canada than in the United States, the prospect for long-term survival of development education in Canada appeared threatened.

The Present

But in fact development education still goes on in Canada in a number of important ways.  Although the Global Education Program as such ceased to be, some activities, supported by provincial federations of teachers, have survived on a more limited scale.  However, only the teachers who have personal interest in international development (i.e., mainly those who have been directly exposed or involved in international development) are willing and know how to fit development issues into the curriculum.  However in the absence of a larger program, it is not clear how development education in a formal school setting will go beyond this core group.

Other activities aimed at the formal education sector have evolved, nevertheless.  For example, Green Teacher produces material for schools that is used both in Canada and the United States.  A recent issue of their magazine, entitled "Development Education: Seeking a Balance," was supported jointly by CIDA, the International Development Research Center (IDRC) and the rock group, the Beastie Boys.  (Green Teacher can be reached at www.web.net/~greentea/.)

Although the "Centers of Excellence" program was abolished and Learner Centers stopped operating under that designation, some organizations and programs survived, although generally with downsized budgets and activities.

For example, IDERA, the center in Vancouver, survived by seeking and getting funding for its ongoing public awareness activities from various sources, such as the Department of Canadian Heritage, the Canadian Government's specific allocations for the "Year of the Pacific" and the provincial ministry responsible for multiculturalism.  Through a combination of community screenings, workshops, Internet web pages, and video production, they are attempting to make linkages between domestic multicultural and international development issues.  They are also developing a Global Education Kit for teachers and a 10-part broadcast series on international development.  This last initiative is actually being funded by the Development Information Program (DIP) of CIDA, which highlights the reality that not all funding for development education community initiatives disappeared with the demise of the PPP.

In fact, coordinated by CIDA's DIP, International Development Week continues.  Held in the first week of February, it involves the participation of many partners, including NGOs and schools across the country.  In recent years, it has had a few high profile spokespersons, notably Bruny Surin, an athlete of Haitian origin and gold medal winner at the Atlanta Olympics with the Canadian track relay team.  With the Minister doing a lot of touring and public speaking during that week, however, some are worried that it is in danger of becoming a meaningless, government-sponsored public relations event.

Since 1995, another source of government funding for some development education activities has also appeared through another of CIDA's components, the Canadian Partnership Branch's NGO Division.  The Division provides a number of NGOs with limited support for development education by allowing a small percentage of the funds they receive for their overseas programs to be used for this purpose.  But since these funds are channeled through the NGO Division mainly concerned with overseas work, there is no real importance accorded to the appended development education components, and this severely limits the emergence of any overall development education strategy or even serious coordination among the various organizations' activities.

One promising initiative, however, dates from 1995.  Just as PPP was being abolished, the Canadian Council for International Cooperation (CCIC), the main NGO coordinating body in the country, established a Task Force on Building Public Support for Sustainable Human Development.  Based on the report of the Task Force (issued in September 1996 under the title "Global Citizenship: A New Way Forward"), CCIC launched a major exploration of new approaches to public engagement.  One subsequent step was the establishment of the CCIC awards, which recognize innovative development education activities.

In recent years, the CCIC has been involved in an elaborately planned and implemented campaign called "In Common."  This is an initiative to put the eradication of poverty on the political agenda and includes a number of campaigns around such issues as debt and landmines.  (The CCIC "In Common" website address is www.incommon@web.net).

CCIC also recently organized a National Youth Forum on Globalization that took place in Ottawa in May, 1999.  It brought together a group of 30 young Canadians (between 17 and 28 years of age) to deliberate on issues related to globalization and its impact on local communities and ways of life, provide input from the young citizens to decision-makers, and compare the perspectives brought by youth from different regions of Canada.  A previous stage involved the Canadian public at large in deliberations on globalization organized on a regional basis between March and May 1999.

In Quebec province, the NGO coordinating body (AQOCI) experienced a major and painful downsizing of its staff in 1995 but managed to survive, obtaining funds from the province's Ministry of International Relations.  “Quebec Days for International Solidarity" was established, with their third annual celebration having recently taken place from October 21-31, 1999.  Organized by AQOCI and its member organizations, this event aims at fostering understanding, sharing experiences and developing international awareness in order to bring about more solidarity with other parts of the world.  Targeting all age groups, its activities throughout Quebec include speakers, animation in schools, workshops with young volunteers coming back from the developing world, film and video presentations, exhibits, and various forms of artistic expression such as painting, poetry, and theater.

Hope at the Start of a New Millennium?

Beginning in the middle of 1998, CIDA began to take new interest in development education through a program called "Public Engagement through Partners" which is managed by the NGO Project Facility of the NGO Division.

With an initial budget of only $500,000, it does not represent a total solution to the situation of development education in Canada.  And, at the risk of appearing ungrateful, this renewed government funding of development education is certain to bring back an old issue within the development education community at large.  With its stated intent of “making Canadians aware and involved in international cooperation," the new program appears to have a more limited and self-serving scope than the definition of development education (quoted earlier in this article) provided by the Advisory Committee and preferred by most in this sector.  Indeed, it is narrower than the outreach strategy which CIDA itself proposed in the Manifest Report (CIDA's official document on outreach strategy published way back in 1988).  While the Manifest Report talked of social change, the Agency's awareness strategy relates only to understanding.  It is not surprising, therefore, that some sectors of the non-governmental development education community are somewhat weary of the seemingly one-way "partnership" in which CIDA tells the community what it wants and then funds proposals accordingly.

Still, at this point very few wish to complain, as they welcome this renewed opportunity to get development education activities-- beyond those of International Development Week-- specifically funded by CIDA.  The first round of such funding was held this past February.  It drew 54 eligible proposals, of which 26 were funded.  A second round is planned for Fall, 1999.

The events of recent years have represented a learning experience. The development education community in Canada is making efforts not to put all its eggs in one basket and to diversify its sources of support. More involvement of the for-profit private sector is being explored.  If successful, this expansion of the donor base would be exactly in line with the effort to get more segments of the Canadian population aware and involved.

Once this process is well underway, the next step is to be vigilant that core messages do not become unduly distorted by the wide variety of actors involved.  Indeed, with many organizations engaged, each with its own agenda, the need for coordination would become greater.  The development education community would love to come to a stage where it needed to start worrying about this last problem.  In the meantime, they are still working on creating the conditions for major involvement and awareness by all Canadians.

The Canadian development education community is certainly disappointed that more progress has not been made in the 1990s.  Nevertheless, as we enter the new millennium,  there is hope that the development education effort in Canada will be renewed, going much further to bridge the gap between the challenges that the world faces and the awareness that Canadians have of those challenges, and that this effort will illuminate the role Canadians should play to bring about a more just and sustainable world.

Francois Legault is U.S. Director for Visions in Action, an international non-profit organization that sends volunteers from around the world to six countries in Africa and to Mexico. A Canadian national, he holds a masters degree from Carleton University's Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. Active in the international development field since 1977, he has been working professionally as an international development program manager and consultant for fourteen years. From 1989 to 1991, Mr. Legault worked as Executive Secretary of the National Advisory Committee on Development Education in Canada.

Hunger Notes Home Page

copyright