INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 155

www.rsisinternational.org

Environmental Education and Student Eco-Consciousness Predictors:

Implications for Sustainable Development in Higher Education

Samuel B. Damayon

*, Edwin Edilberto N. Mania

, Nicole Anne P. Aquino

, Ruthie Maye R. Padilla

1,2,3

Saint Mary’s University, Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines

World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.15020000014

Received: 16 February 2026; Accepted: 21 February 2026; Published: 03 March 2026

ABSTRACT

This study explores the crucial nexus between environmental education (EE) and sustainable development (SD)

by investigating students' eco-consciousness in collaboration with the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF)

Philippines. In an era characterized by escalating environmental concerns and the imperative for sustainable

practices, understanding the role of education in fostering environmental sustainability is paramount. The

research employed a quantitative method approach, using a survey to comprehensively examine students'

attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors toward environmental issues and sustainable living practices. Drawing on a

diverse sample of students across educational levels, the study found that at Saint Mary’s University, students

have a high level of environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship. It was further

affirmed that those three environmental concepts are intricately influencing one another. The profile variables

of gender, age, type of high school they graduated from, and religion are not influential or predictive of their

environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship. However, school, year level, and

ethnicity are influential or predictive. Finally, Saint Mary’s University is fertile ground for environmental

sustainability practices, as students have a high level of environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and

environmental stewardship, which are important dimensions of environmental sustainability. It was then

recommended that its programs, projects, and activities be sustained and intensified to protect and conserve the

environment.

Keywords: Environmental Education, Environmental Stewardship, Eco-consciousness, Environmental

Sustainability, Sustainable Development

INTRODUCTION

A key theory in environmental education and sustainability is the Knowledge-Awareness/Attitude-Action

theory, created by Charles Ramsey and Roy Rickson in 1976. This theory suggests that we can change people's

behavior by increasing their knowledge and awareness of environmental protection and related issues, as

Hungerford and Volk (1990) noted. This idea is relevant in education. The belief is that the more people learn

about environmental issues, the more responsible they will become, leading to better environmental protection.

The relationship between knowledge and action is not always straightforward. The philosopher Socrates

suggested that if someone knows what is right, they will act accordingly. However, while knowledge is

important, it is not enough to develop ecological consciousness; ecological intention is also crucial for promoting

environmental sustainability among students (Dzhamalova et al., 2019). Al-Faleh (2022) supports this idea by

comparing students' awareness of sustainable development with their intentions to implement ecological

programs, highlighting the necessity of both knowledge and intention. This aligns with the Theory of Reasoned

Action (TRA), which states that a person’s intentions to act are influenced by social pressures or "subjective

norms," reflecting their perceptions of others’ opinions (Vallerand et al., 1992; Al-Suqri & Rahma Mihammad

Al-Kharusi, 2015).However, to operationalize responsible environmental behavior, UNESCO and the United

Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) organized an Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental

Education in Tbilisi, Georgia, as early as 1977. The intergovernmental conference led to the Tbilisi declaration

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 156

www.rsisinternational.org

that outlined several key objectives for environmental education, including 1) Awareness and Sensitivity:

Developing an awareness of the environment and its challenges, 2) Knowledge and Understanding: Providing

individuals with knowledge of the environment and its interconnectedness with human activities, 3) Attitudes

and Values: Cultivating attitudes and values that support environmental protection and sustainable development,

4) Skills and Competence: Enabling individuals to acquire skills for environmental problem-solving and

responsible decision-making, and 5) Participation: Encouraging active participation in addressing environmental

challenges (Hungerford, H. & Trudi Volk, 1990).An eco-conscious person and environmental advocate is aware

of environmental issues and understands related challenges. They are concerned about environmental protection,

have the skills to identify and address problems, and actively participate in solutions (Hungerford & Volk, 1990).

True advocates not only have knowledge of these issues but also a commitment to take action to protect the

environment.

This presents challenges for educational institutions, impacting all aspects of learning. Since the 1970s, many

programs and studies have emerged to address environmental issues and promote sustainability, which this study

sought to examine. Additionally, environmental education programs evolved to emphasize long-term

sustainability, addressing immediate improvements while preparing for future challenges (Tilbury, D.,

1995).Environmental education has been in the curriculum for a long time, yet why do we still have lingering

environmental problems? However, there could be more factors, such as economics and politics. However, let

us focus on education for almost all persons, whether formally or informally, passing through the education

portals. Recently, there have been theories suggesting that environmental education should incorporate the

concept of action. One of the reasons is the influence of scientism in environmental education, where the focus

is often on giving pupils knowledge about the seriousness and extent of the environmental problems, which has

not been capable of addressing the social and societal perspectives involved in questions about the root causes

of problems and the action possibilities which are open to society and the individual (Jensen, B. & Karsten

Schnack, 1997).

In Europe, the United Kingdom in 2020 opened the “Green Jobs Taskforce” to create 2 million green jobs. Their

strategy is to support carbon literacy training for schools and universities for sustainability by 2025. Some of

their strategies are 1) Climate education, where students will develop a better understanding of climate change

and a greater connection to nature to tackle both the causes and impact of climate change, 2) Education estate

and digital infrastructure, where students and their communities will be inspired to live sustainable lives with a

green physical environment in and around education settings to promote both their physical and mental

wellbeing, and 3) Operations and supply chains, where students will be introduced to more sustainable practice

for waste prevention, resource efficiency and the circular economy (Okada, A., 2023). This UK initiative and

others demonstrate the important role that schools, colleges, and universities play in environmental education,

fostering eco-consciousness among our young students towards environmental sustainability.

In today’s environmental concerns, environmental education is considered to be very important in this decade

for developing environmental awareness among the common people. It is considered helpful for developing a

good quality of life and for developing ideas and practices for maintaining a sustainable environment

(Laiphrakpam, M., et. al., 2020). However, it must be remembered that environmental education is

interdisciplinary, as it aims to develop knowledge, build skills, and change the attitudes and lifestyles of students

and future citizens to conserve the environment (JSOEE, 2016).

Environmental Education can be arranged into many stages in its progress. The first step is environmental

awareness. Environmental awareness or knowledge includes understanding the main relationships between

nature and human beings, as well as initiatives to protect the natural and future environment. Many studies have

shown that environmental awareness is closely related to factors such as human perception of environmental

problems, interdependence and relations between humans and nature, and people’s behavior and attitudes

towards the environment (Huckle, H., 1991).

This concern connects us with one’s eco-consciousness. However, according to O’Sullivan and Taylor (2004),

today's education has failed to evoke eco-consciousness in the general public. Thus, as early as the year 2000s,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 157

www.rsisinternational.org

there were calls for reform in environmental education, which must. The reform calls for a more holistic,

qualitative approach to be relevant to today’s movement against environmental destruction (Kanerva, T., 2006).

Recently, there has been much research about students’ eco-consciousness. This was premised on the idea that

action towards environmental protection would not be successful if students in the education sector were

unaware of environmental concepts, problems, and issues, and of conservation efforts. Ecological knowledge

will be important for more successful environmental protection in the next few years. However, to be more

realistic, education must add factors besides knowledge acquisition, like skills and will, to implement all these

ideas (Capra, 1996), (Kanerva, T., 2006).

A study conducted by Robyn Molsher in 2015 in Australia among environmental volunteers found that

environmental volunteering engages students to be more conscious about ecological problems (Molsher, 2015).

This would show that, indeed, ecological instruction, when coupled with other skills training and activities,

would be more beneficial for the development of students' eco-consciousness. A study in Pakistan found that

promoting ecological consciousness in everyday life is very important, particularly in education. It was suggested

that universities must work to formulate policies and plans grounded in green and sustainable concepts, including

sustainability-based practices and behaviors across the university domain and infrastructure (Kahn, A. et al.,

2024).

In Jordan, a study was conducted among students to determine the connection between their eco-consciousness

and their intention to implement their school-based environmental program. It was found that students' eco-

consciousness regarding sustainable environmental development significantly influenced their intention to

implement the eco-school program in their schools in Jordan. In this study, pro-environmental behavior or eco-

consciousness was defined as a behavior that consciously seeks to reduce the negative impact of one's actions

on the natural and built worlds (e.g., reducing resource and energy consumption, using non-toxic substances,

and reducing waste pollution) (Al-Faleh, H & Baker Al Serhan, 2022).

Eco-consciousness is the awareness that fosters positive behaviors toward a sustainable society. Taina Kanerva's

2006 study examined high school students in Ontario and found that their experiences with nature and teachers'

values play a vital role in developing eco-consciousness. This highlights the need for transformative education,

as traditional methods are often insufficient for effective environmental education. Harold Hungerford and Trudi

Volk (1990) noted that many programs focus solely on raising awareness without fostering ownership and

empowerment among learners. New strategies are essential to address these challenges.

A key concept in environmental sustainability is environmental stewardship. Robert Falkner and Barry Buzan

(2019) note its historical development from a concern within European society to a focus on the Global

International Society (GIS), largely driven by UN conventions. Driscoll et al. (2012) emphasized the need for a

more effective approach to environmental stewardship, highlighting that the urgency and complexity of global

sustainability challenges require new strategies that leverage expert knowledge. They advocate for collaboration

between scientists and policymakers, stressing that long-term research is essential for addressing these

significant challenges.

What is environmental stewardship? Bennett et al. (2018) define it as the actions taken by individuals or groups

to protect and responsibly use the environment for various environmental and social outcomes. This aligns with

Jennifer Welchman's definition, which emphasizes the responsible management of human activities affecting

the environment to conserve resources for future generations and accepting accountability for one's actions

(Welchman, J., 2012).

The United Nations Millennium Declaration reiterated in the 2000 UN Secretary’s report, states, "We resolve

therefore to adopt in all our environmental actions a new ethic of conservation and stewardship.” The buzzword

has been challenged as “inherently sexist, and anthropocentric as well as religious” (Welchman, J., 2012), but it

has become the guiding concept for policymakers in the international realm. The emergence of environmental

stewardship as a coherent set of purposive ideas and beliefs within GIS is a story involving both the interplay of

interstate and world society and the spread of a norm from the local to the global scale (Falkner, R. & Barry

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 158

www.rsisinternational.org

Buzan, 2019). All of these environmental concepts and efforts, through research and policymaking, led to the

formation of the so-called environmental education for sustainability.

According to Daniella Tilbury (1995), the word “Sustainability” was first given currency by the World

Conservation Strategy, which refers to (a) the need for reconciliation between economic development and

environmental conservation, (b) the need to place any understanding of environmental concerns within a socio-

economic and political context, and (c) the need to combine environment and development concerns. The

strategy redirected the goals of environmental education toward what it called education for sustainable

development.

The United Nations has long been a leader in environmental protection, emphasizing its importance through

various international conventions. It highlights the critical role of education, stating that “education is essential

for promoting sustainable development and enhancing people's ability to tackle environmental and development

issues” (UNESCO, 1992, para. 36.3, p. 2). Environmental education must adopt a holistic approach to effectively

address environmental problems like air pollution. This involves understanding the broader context, including

history, values, perceptions, and traditional practices that contribute to these issues, and exploring potential

solutions (Meadows, 1990).

Figure 1 below presents a framework already explained above, assuming that when a person is knowledgeable

about something, that knowledge can translate into awareness and attitudes, and ultimately into action.

Figure 1: Traditional Thinking Framework

However, this approach to environmental education is widely criticized because knowing something does not

always translate into doing it. Thus, knowing that the environment needs to be protected and conserved does not

always lead people to take steps to do so. The whole framework is anchored in the idea that we can change

students' behavior by providing them with more knowledge about environmental problems and issues

(Hungerford, H., and Trudi Volk, 1990).

This study aims to evaluate environmental stewardship among Saint Mary’s University students by assessing

their awareness and eco-consciousness, which are crucial for sustainable environmental education. It seeks to

measure respondents' environmental knowledge, eco-consciousness, and stewardship, and to determine whether

there is a significant relationship between these factors. The research will also examine if demographic profiles

influence environmental knowledge and stewardship. Additionally, the study will discuss the implications of the

findings for environmental sustainability and offer recommendations for the university and other higher

educational institutions. The study hypothesizes that there is no significant relationship between environmental

knowledge, eco-consciousness, and stewardship, and that demographic variables do not predict these aspects.

METHODOLOGY

The study employed a quantitative-descriptive research design to systematically collect data to describe a

phenomenon, situation, or population. Descriptive research is a method used to determine the characteristics of

a population or particular phenomenon (Creswell, 2009). Using descriptive research, one can identify patterns

in a group's characteristics to establish everything one needs to understand, apart from why something has

happened. This study quantitatively and descriptively examined Saint Mary's University tertiary students'

environmental knowledge, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 159

www.rsisinternational.org

The study was conducted at Saint Mary’s University, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, among its tertiary students

in the first semester of the School Year 2024-2025. The study used purposive sampling to choose the final

participants. The majority of the participants were female (69.03%) and aged 17-20 years (70.08%). Most

students attended private high schools (64.38%), and a significant proportion identified as Catholic (62.79%). In

terms of ethnicity, Ilokano was the largest group (43.97%), followed by Tagalog (22.94%) and Ifugao (16.60%).

Participants were distributed across schools, with the highest number from SAB (28.65%), and year levels, with

most being second-year students (29.39%).

The research instrument was adopted from Rogayan & Nebrida (2019) and De Chano (2006) papers. However,

a few items were changed to contextualize the study. There are three parts of the instrument. The research

instrument consists of three parts: questions about students' environmental awareness, their eco-consciousness

reflecting attitudes toward environmental issues, and their environmental stewardship, which indicates the

actions they take to protect and conserve the environment. The data were collected through an online survey

using a Google Form, with assurances of data privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent from the

respondents.

Data gathered were analyzed using Frequency and Percentage to measure the demographic profile of the

respondents descriptively; Mean and Standard Deviation to describe the respondents' environmental awareness,

eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship levels; Pearson r or Spearman’s Rho (p) to determine if there

is a relationship between the respondents' level of environmental awareness and eco-consciousness with their

environmental stewardship; and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to determine if the profile variables determine

the respondents' environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The study determined the level of environmental stewardship of Saint Mary’s University students during the

first semester of the school year 2024-2025 through levels of awareness and eco-consciousness, with a view to

determining their potential for sustainability in environmental education.

Section 1: Environmental Knowledge

Table 1: Respondents’ level of environmental knowledge

Environmental Knowledge Indicators

Mean

1. Agenda 21 is a plan of the United Nations in which large developing

countries promised to develop their industries with an eye toward protecting

the environment.

3.06

1.18

2. Rainforests are the world’s most biologically diverse ecosystems.

4.24

0.86

3. Global warming is brought about by rising levels of heat-trapping gases,

known as greenhouse gases, in the atmosphere.

4.51

0.70

4. The atmosphere's ozone layer protects life on Earth by absorbing harmful

ultraviolet radiation from the Sun.

4.53

0.73

5. Sustainable development means increasing standards of living without

destroying the environment.

4.44

0.76

6. Desertification is the decline in the biological or economic productivity of

the soil in dry and semi-dry areas resulting from various factors including

human activities.

3.78

0.94

7. Acid rain is a form of air pollution in which airborne acids produced by

electric utility plants and other sources fall to Earth in distant regions.

3.94

0.92

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 160

www.rsisinternational.org

8. Indigenous peoples are those who have inhabited and made their living

directly off the same environment for hundreds or thousands of years.

4.21

0.83

9. There is only one percent of all the water in the world that is available for

drinking.

3.49

1.06

10. According to the Philippine Constitution, it is the state’s primary duty to

protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful

ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

3.90

0.95

11. Animals alive today are most likely to become extinct because the habitat

where they live is destroyed

4.31

0.82

12. The name of the global agency that works to protect the physical earth is the

United National Environmental Programmes (UNEP)

3.45

1.02

13. Burning fossil fuels (in machines) has increased the atmosphere's carbon

dioxide content and is likely to cause a warmer climate on our planet.

4.26

0.86

14. Radical changes to society, like change of perspectives, are needed to tackle

climate change

4.08

0.88

15. Schools are agents in the preservation and conservation of the environment.

4.29

0.80

Overall

4.03

0.58

Legend: 1.00-1.49 (NK- Not Knowledgeable); 1.50-2.49 (SK-Slightly Knowledgeable); 2.50-3.49 (MK-

Moderately Knowledgeable); 3.50-4.49 (VK-Very Knowledgeable); 4.50-5.00 (HK-Highly Knowledgeable)

The analysis above reveals that participants are generally very knowledgeable about the factors that endanger

our environment, including facts and concepts about the environment, and attempt to conserve it, with an overall

Mean of 4.03. However, it must be noted that the level of knowledge is highly knowledgeable regarding concerns

regarding the role of the ozone layer in protecting the environment and global warming, with a Mean of 4.53

and 4.51, respectively. However, they have minimal knowledge of the United Nations agencies responsible for

protecting the environment and the international agenda aimed at protecting it, with a Mean of 3.45 and 3.06,

respectively.

The above analysis indicates that the respondent students at Saint Mary’s University are very knowledgeable

about the condition of the environment and the factors that contribute to its degradation. They are knowledgeable

about factual information and understand the environment, including ecosystems, biodiversity, environmental

issues, and the impact of human activities. They are very knowledgeable about scientific concepts, data, and

facts related to environmental concerns. This could be attributed to the fact that many environmental programs

at the university, such as the Clean, Healthy, Safe, and Friendly Environment program, aim to promote

environmental education. Given that respondents are college students and highly mature young individuals who

have been in school for more than half of their lives, they are expected to be knowledgeable about the current

state of the environment and other contributing factors, as well as efforts to protect and conserve the environment.

This is a very important finding, since, according to Hungerford & Volk (1990), an eco-conscious and

environmental advocate is someone who is aware and sensitive to environmental problems and has a basic

understanding of the environment and its associated problems. Knowledge of environmental concerns is a very

important foundation for environmental stewardship or even sustainability. The Knowledge-

Awareness/Attitude-Action theory, developed by Charles Ramsey and Roy Rickson (1976), posits that we can

change people's behavior by making them knowledgeable and aware of environmental protection and related

issues. One could believe that they can be more responsible when more people are knowledgeable and aware of

environmental issues. This line of thinking holds that the more people know about environmental concerns, the

more responsible they become, leading to better environmental protection. Hala Al-Faleh (2022) found in his

study that students’ awareness of sustainable environmental development was compared with their intention to

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 161

www.rsisinternational.org

implement ecological programs. The study highlighted the importance of knowledge and an individual's

intention when it comes to environmental sustainability

Section 2: Eco-Consciousness

Table 2: Participants’ level of eco-consciousness

Eco-Consciousness Indicators

Mean

1. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support.

4.05

0.80

2. I pay attention to water consumption when using the sink and toilet.

4.34

0.76

3. When humans interfere with nature, it often produces disastrous

consequences.

4.23

0.76

4. I believe that individual actions can make a difference in protecting the

environment.

4.68

0.59

5. Everything I do on a daily basis contributes to the problem of climate

change

3.82

1.03

6. The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop

them.

4.55

0.67

7. Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist.

4.54

0.73

8. The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern

industrial nations.

3.86

1.09

9. Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature.

4.42

0.66

10. The so-called ‘ecological crisis’ facing humankind is something that

everybody has to face squarely.

4.33

0.71

11. The Earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources.

3.97

1.00

12. Young people should have a good environmental awareness for a

sustainable environment.

4.67

0.60

13. The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset.

4.17

0.79

14. Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to

control it.

4.13

0.88

15. If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major

ecological catastrophe.

4.55

0.65

Overall

4.29

0.46

Legend: 1.00-1.49 (SD-Strongly Disagree); 1.50-2.49 (DI-Disagree); 2.50-3.49 (UN-Unsure); 3.50-4.49 (AG-

Agree); 4.50-5.00 (SA-Strongly Agree)

The table above shows that respondents agree with the statements, indicating their eco-consciousness, with a

Mean of 4.29. It is also notable that they strongly agree with the idea that individual actions can make a difference

in protecting the environment (M=4.68), Young people should have a good environmental awareness for a

sustainable environment (M=4.67), The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop

them (M=4.55), If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological

catastrophe (M=4.55), and Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist (M=4.54).

The above analysis indicates that respondents’ environmental consciousness is very high. It shows a very high

recognition of the interconnectedness between humans and the environment and a sense of responsibility towards

the natural world. Furthermore, the analysis shows that respondents have very good attitudes, values, and

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 162

www.rsisinternational.org

behaviors, prioritizing environmental protection. Eco-consciousness is the awareness that facilitates and

motivates positive human behaviors toward an environmentally sound and sustainable society. A study by Taina

Kanerva (2006) examined how eco-consciousness developed among high school students in Ontario, Canada,

and concluded that students' actual experience with nature and teachers' value systems influence students' eco-

consciousness. This experience with high school students shows that transformative education is possible,

particularly in fostering eco-consciousness.

It has been assumed that when a person is knowledgeable about something, that knowledge can translate into

awareness and attitudes, and ultimately into action. However, this approach to environmental education is widely

criticized because knowing something does not always translate into doing it. Thus, knowing that the

environment needs to be protected and conserved does not always lead people to take steps to do so. The whole

framework is anchored in the idea that we can change students' behavior by providing them with more knowledge

about environmental problems and issues (Hungerford, H., and Trudi Volk, 1990). Ecological knowledge will

be important for more successful environmental protection in the next few years. However, to be more realistic,

education must add factors besides knowledge acquisition, like skills and will, to implement all these ideas

(Capra, 1996), (Kanerva, T., 2006). And so, eco-consciousness is very important in environmental protection

activities.

Section 3: Environmental Stewardship

Table 3: Respondents’ level of environmental stewardship

Environmental Stewardship Indicators

Mean

1. Turn off the lights and unplug appliances when not in use to save electricity.

4.67

0.58

2. We should harness solar energy, a radiation produced by nuclear fusion

reactions deep in the Sun’s core.

3.84

1.05

3. Plant endemic trees in the vacant areas in the community to prevent soil

erosion and get more oxygen to breathe.

3.97

1.06

4. Avoid the use of plastic and Styrofoam, which cause harm not only to the

environment but also to human health.

4.21

0.91

5. Avoid throwing garbage anywhere and learn the science of segregation of

solid wastes.

4.69

0.58

6. Keep a good food ethics and avoid eating with leftovers and wasting drinking

water.

4.59

0.65

7. Lessening the use of detergents, for they tend to create foam in gutters and in

sewage-disposal plants and even appear in naturally occurring ground and

surface waters.

3.95

0.98

8. Practice the science of composting which produces partially decomposed

organic material used in gardening to improve soil and enhance plant growth.

4.26

0.89

9. Recycle and reuse non-biodegradable materials to lessen solid wastes.

4.51

0.71

10. Use reusable water bottles or tumblers instead of buying bottled water in the

canteen or stores.

4.61

0.65

11. Organize or attend an environmental forum or symposium with your fellow

youth and the community people.

4.02

1.01

12. Volunteer to organizational groups that help preserve and conserve the

environment.

3.99

1.00

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 163

www.rsisinternational.org

13. Support initiatives, environmental protection, and conservation programs like

the university's CHSF and Green Campus Program.

4.50

0.71

14. Encourage everyone to be an ambassador of the environment in their

respective communities, specifically your fellow youth.

4.19

0.92

15. When buying, I prefer those with minimal packaging, and I do not use single

plastic use.

4.30

0.86

Overall

4.29

0.60

Legend: 1.00-1.49 (NE-Never); 1.50-2.49 (SE-Seldom); 2.50-3.49 (SO-Sometimes); 3.50-4.49 (OF-Often); 4.50-

5.00 (AL-Always)

The table above shows that the respondent students at Saint Mary’s University often perform or agree with the

performance of the environmental stewardship practices listed above, with an overall Mean of 4.29. It is

noteworthy that in six areas, they always follow the above-listed environmental stewardship practices - Avoid

throwing garbage anywhere and learn the science of segregation of solid wastes (4.69), Turn off the lights and

unplug appliances when not in use to save electricity (4.67), Use reusable water bottles or tumblers instead of

buying bottled water in the canteen or stores (4.61), Keep good food ethics and avoid eating with leftovers and

wasting drinking water (4.59), Recycle and reuse non-biodegradable materials to lessen solid wastes (4.51),

Support initiatives, environmental protection, and conservation programs like the university's CHSF and Green

Campus Program (4.50).

The analysis shows that students at Saint Mary’s University exhibit a high level of environmental stewardship.

The university's Clean, Healthy, Safe, and Friendly (CHSF) program, active for over two decades, has been

effective but has experienced a decline in practice from great to moderate, prompting researchers to recommend

the creation of an oversight office (Maslang et al., 2022). Despite the pandemic potentially halting the program,

students still demonstrate strong environmental stewardship. This can be attributed to the effective

reimplementation of the CHSF program after the pandemic, the launch of the green campus project, various

community engagement efforts, and the university's commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

and the Laudato Si campaign.

Section 4: Significant Relationships of Students’ awareness, Eco-consciousness and their Environmental

Stewardship

Table 4: Significant relations between students’ awareness and eco-consciousness and their environmental

stewardship

Environmental

Awareness

Eco-

consciousness

Environmental

Stewardship

Environmental

Awareness

Pearson Correlation

.503

***

.381

***

p-value

.001

Moderate Positive

Correlation

Low Positive

Correlation

Eco-consciousness

Pearson Correlation

.503

***

.423

***

p-value

.001

Moderate Positive

Correlation

Moderate Positive

Correlation

Environmental

Stewardship

Pearson Correlation

.381

***

.423

***

p-value

.001

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 164

www.rsisinternational.org

Low Positive

Correlation

Moderate Positive

Correlation

Pearson r

Qualitative Description

+0.80 – +0.99

Very High Correlation

+0.60 – +0.79

High Correlation

+0.40 – +0.59

Moderate Correlation

+0.20 – +0.39

Low Correlation

+0.01 – +0.19

Very Low Correlation

*** significant at α=0.001

The analysis reveals significant positive relationships among students’ environmental awareness, eco-

consciousness, and environmental stewardship. Environmental awareness has a moderate positive correlation

with eco-consciousness (r = 0.503, p = 0.001) and a low positive correlation with environmental stewardship (r

= 0.381, p = 0.001). Similarly, eco-consciousness demonstrates a moderate positive correlation with both

environmental awareness (r = 0.503, p = 0.001) and environmental stewardship (r = 0.423, p = 0.001).

Additionally, environmental stewardship shows a low positive correlation with environmental awareness (r =

0.381, p = 0.001) and a moderate positive correlation with eco-consciousness (r = 0.423, p = 0.001).

These findings suggest that as students’ environmental awareness and eco-consciousness improve, their

environmental stewardship also increases, highlighting the interconnectedness of these variables. This finding is

supported by Tilbury (1995), who developed a threefold approach that encompasses the whole cycle from

awareness, through understanding, to taking concern and responsibility, and then taking action as part of

environmental education for sustainability. If this is the case, then one can be assured that at Saint Mary’s

University, environmental stewardship is being practiced by individuals, groups, or networks of actors with

various motivations and levels of capacity to protect, care for or responsibly use the environment in pursuit of

environmental and/or social outcomes in diverse social-ecological contexts (Bennet, et al., 2018). These findings

also strengthen the traditional theory that when a person is knowledgeable about something, that knowledge can

translate into awareness and attitudes, and ultimately into action, which is called the Knowledge-Awareness-

Action Framework (Hungerford & Volk, 1990).

The results also echo the spirit of open schooling promoted by the European Union, which refers to schools as

agents of well-being (Hazelkorn et al., 2015). We-CARE: The first stage is mainly informal learning with

professionals and family, engaging students with the challenge of real-life and future-oriented issues to stimulate

questions and create a ‘need to know’, which teachers can harness in the next stage. We-KNOW: The second

stage is formal learning focused on students acquiring the scientific understanding and skills they need to make

decisions and take action in the final stage. We-DO: In this stage, students apply the skills and knowledge they

have acquired to participatory science actions, defining ways to address the given challenge and minimize its

impact (Okada, 2023).

Section 5: Profile Variable as Predictors of Students’ Environmental Awareness, Eco-consciousness, and

Environmental Stewardship

Gender - An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to determine if participants' gender significantly

influenced their levels of Environmental Awareness, Eco-consciousness, and Environmental Stewardship.

Results indicated no statistically significant differences across the three measures by gender. For Environmental

Awareness, the mean scores ranged from 3.95 to 4.13, with no significant variation among the gender groups

(F(3, 942) = 0.834, p = .475). Similarly, for Eco-consciousness, the mean scores ranged from 4.17 to 4.36, with

no significant differences observed (F(3, 942) = 2.782, p = .060). Lastly, for Environmental Stewardship, the

mean scores ranged from 4.15 to 4.37, and again, no significant differences were found among the gender groups

(F(3, 942) = 1.854, p = .136).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 165

www.rsisinternational.org

These results suggest that participants’ gender does not significantly determine their levels of environmental

knowledge, eco-consciousness, or environmental stewardship. It would mean that whether a student is male,

female, or LGBTQIA would not be a determinant in the student's level of knowledge, awareness, and

stewardship. This could also be observed that they have almost the same Mean ratings.

Age - The analysis shows that age does not significantly affect the participants' levels of environmental

awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship. Across the three measures, the mean scores are

relatively similar among the age groups (17–20, 21–24, and 25 and above). The F-values for environmental

awareness (F = 1.351, p = 0.257), eco-consciousness (F = 1.53, p = 0.205), and environmental stewardship (F =

0.107, p = 0.956) are not statistically significant, indicating no notable differences between the age groups. This

suggests that age is not a determining factor in these environmental measures.

These results suggest that participants’ age does not significantly determine their levels of environmental

knowledge, eco-consciousness, or environmental stewardship. It would mean that whether a student is younger

or older than the average university student age, it would not be a determinant in the student's level of knowledge,

awareness, and stewardship. This could also be observed that they have almost the same Mean ratings.

Table 5: School as a determinant of the level of environmental knowledge, eco-consciousness, and stewardship

Measure

School

Mean

F-value

value

Environmental

Awareness

Accountancy and Business

271

3.95

0.64

4.977**

0.002

Health and Natural Sciences

243

4.13

0.55

Teacher Education and Humanities

231

3.99

0.57

Engineering, Architecture, and

Information Technology

201

4.08

0.53

Eco-

consciousness

Accountancy and Business

271

4.25

0.45

2.112

0.097

Health and Natural Sciences

243

4.35

0.47

Teacher Education and Humanities

231

4.28

0.44

Engineering, Architecture, and

Information Technology

201

4.27

0.48

Environmental

Stewardship

Accountancy and Business

271

4.30

0.60

2.782*

0.040

Health and Natural Sciences

243

4.37

0.57

Teacher Education and Humanities

231

4.24

0.61

Engineering, Architecture, and

Information Technology

201

4.23

0.62

** significant at α=0.01; * significant at α=0.05

The ANOVA revealed significant differences in Environmental Awareness (F = 4.977, p = 0.002) among the

groups. Specifically, students from SHANS (M=4.13, SD=0.55) and SEAIT (M=4.08, SD=0.53) scored

significantly higher compared to those from SAB (M=3.95, SD=0.64) and STEH (M=3.99, SD=0.57). For Eco-

consciousness, there were no significant differences across groups (F=2.112, p=0.097), indicating that the mean

scores were relatively similar. However, for Environmental Stewardship, significant differences were observed

(F = 2.782, p = 0.040). Students from SHANS (M=4.37, SD=0.57) scored significantly higher than students

from SAB (M=4.30, SD=0.60), STEH (M=4.24, SD=0.61), and SEAIT (M=4.23, SD=0.62).

These findings suggest that school affiliation may influence students' environmental awareness and stewardship,

with students from the School of Health and Natural Sciences (SHANS) and the School of Engineering,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 166

www.rsisinternational.org

Architecture, and Information Technology (SEAIT) showing higher awareness and the School of Health and

Natural Sciences (SHANS) demonstrating greater stewardship. In terms of environmental knowledge, these

findings may be explained by the fact that SHANS and SEAIT are schools with greater theoretical and practical

relevance to environmental concerns. The former is more concerned with the health implications of

environmental problems, and the latter with engineering and architectural designs related to environmental

changes and disasters. In terms of environmental stewardship, the School of Health and Natural Sciences

(SHANS) has a higher level of environmental stewardship since it is more aware and more conscious of the

health implications of a hazardous environment.

Table 6: Year Level as a determinant of the level of environmental knowledge, eco-consciousness, and

stewardship

Measure

Groups

Mean

F-value

p-value

Environmental Awareness

First Year

265

3.99

0.62

0.998

0.407

Second Year

278

4.08

0.54

Third Year

222

4.01

0.56

Fourth Year

175

4.06

0.62

Fifth Year

4.08

0.67

Eco-consciousness

First Year

265

4.17

0.45

8.456***

0.001

Second Year

278

4.33

0.41

Third Year

222

4.31

0.45

Fourth Year

175

4.38

0.46

Fifth Year

3.90

1.33

Environmental Stewardship

First Year

265

4.25

0.61

0.498

0.737

Second Year

278

4.29

0.58

Third Year

222

4.3

0.57

Fourth Year

175

4.32

0.63

Fifth Year

4.4

1.05

*** significant at α=0.001

The analysis examined whether year level determines students' levels of environmental awareness, eco-

consciousness, and environmental stewardship. The results revealed no significant differences in Environmental

Awareness across year levels (F=0.998, p=0.407), indicating that students' environmental knowledge is

consistent across years, with mean scores ranging from 3.99 to 4.08. Similarly, there were no significant

differences in Environmental Stewardship (F=0.498, p=0.737), as all year levels reported comparable levels,

with mean scores between 4.25 and 4.40. However, Eco-consciousness varied significantly by year level

(F=8.456, p<0.001). Fourth Year students demonstrated the highest level of eco-consciousness (4.38), followed

by Second Year (4.33) and Third Year (4.31). In contrast, First Year students scored slightly lower (4.17), while

Fifth Year students had the lowest eco-consciousness level (3.90).

These findings suggest that while students' environmental knowledge and stewardship are unaffected by year

level, eco-consciousness is influenced, with more advanced students generally exhibiting higher levels, except

for those in their fifth year. Eco-consciousness is the awareness that facilitates and motivates positive human

behaviors toward an environmentally sound and sustainable society (Kanerva, 2006). The result would mean

that higher-year students are more aware and concerned about environmental issues, which are often tied to their

values, ethics, and personal responsibility. For example, they may feel more concern about climate change and

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 167

www.rsisinternational.org

support sustainable practices. This could also be due to the environmental awareness they had gained over the

years of their education.

Types of high school that respondents graduated from - The results suggest that participants' high school

type (private or public) does not significantly influence their levels of environmental awareness, eco-

consciousness, or environmental stewardship. Private school participants reported slightly higher scores on

environmental awareness (M = 4.05, SD = 0.56) than public school participants (M = 4.00, SD = 0.63), but the

difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.730, p = .189). Similarly, private school participants had

marginally higher eco-consciousness (M = 4.30, SD = 0.45) than public school participants (M = 4.27, SD =

0.47), yet this difference was not significant (t = 0.553, p = .457). Lastly, for environmental stewardship, public

school participants scored slightly higher (M = 4.30, SD = 0.60) than private school participants (M = 4.28, SD

= 0.60), but the difference was also not significant (t = 0.084, p = .772).

From the analysis above, the type of high school from which respondents graduated does not decisively shape

participants' environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, or environmental stewardship.

This would only mean that, in the Philippines, where schools are generally categorized as public or private, the

respondents' high school does not affect their environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, or environmental

stewardship. It may mean that whether they are in a public or private high school, they receive similar

environmental education. It may mean further that public and private schools provide the same environmental

education to their students.

Religion - The analysis examined whether respondents' religion influenced their levels of environmental

awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship. Results indicated no significant differences

between the two groups across all three measures: environmental awareness (t = 2.154, p = 0.142), eco-

consciousness (t = 0.739, p = 0.390), and environmental stewardship (t = 0.569, p = 0.451).

This suggests that participants' religion does not determine their levels of environmental knowledge, eco-

consciousness, or stewardship. This would only mean that, in the Philippines, where the majority are Catholics

or Christians, respondents' religion does not affect their environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, or

environmental stewardship.

It may mean that whether they are Catholics or non-Catholics, they receive similar environmental instructions

from their religious groups. It may mean further that Catholic or non-Catholic Churches provide the same

environmental instructions to their church members.

Table 7: Ethnicity as a determinant of the level of environmental knowledge, eco-consciousness, and

stewardship

Measure

Groups

Mean

F-value

p-value

Environmental Awareness

Ilokano

416

4.08

0.60

1.790

0.129

Tagalog

217

4.02

0.52

Ifugao

157

3.98

0.55

Igorot

4.01

0.61

Others

3.93

0.67

Eco-consciousness

Ilokano

416

4.33

0.48

1.828

0.121

Tagalog

217

4.24

0.44

Ifugao

157

4.26

0.44

Igorot

4.23

0.48

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 168

www.rsisinternational.org

Others

4.32

0.42

Environmental Stewardship

Ilokano

416

4.37

0.58

6.758***

0.001

Tagalog

217

4.31

0.55

Ifugao

157

4.10

0.63

Igorot

4.18

0.68

Others

4.25

0.600

*** significant at α=0.001

The analysis reveals that participants' ethnicity does not significantly influence their levels of environmental

awareness (F = 1.790, p = 0.129) or eco-consciousness (F = 1.828, p = 0.121). These findings suggest that ethnic

differences do not play a substantial role in shaping these dimensions.

However, a significant difference was found in environmental stewardship (F = 6.758, p = 0.001), indicating

that ethnicity may influence this measure.

Post-hoc comparisons show that Ilokano, Tagalog, and participants classified as "Others" scored significantly

higher compared to Ifugao and Igorot groups.

The post hoc results suggest that while ethnicity does not determine environmental awareness and eco-

consciousness, it may shape environmental stewardship behaviors.

This result may be explained by the fact that Indigenous people are closer to the natural environment and can

observe and experience its destruction, in contrast to most Tagalogs or Ilocanos, who are more situated in urban

environments.

Section 6: Students’ Environmental Awareness, Eco-consciousness, Environmental Stewardship, and

Environmental Sustainability

Environmental Sustainability is closely connected with several Millennium Development Goals. The Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs) related to environmental sustainability primarily focus on protecting the planet,

ensuring the sustainable use of natural resources, and addressing climate change.

If we cannot sustain the environment, all efforts for the SDGs will only be in vain. The related SDGs include

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation; SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy; SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and

Communities; SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production; SDG 13: Climate Action; SDG 14: Life

Below Water; and SDG 15: Life on Land.

These goals are interrelated and address various aspects of environmental sustainability, including resource

management, biodiversity conservation, and climate change mitigation. Each goal includes specific targets and

indicators to track progress and ensure that environmental sustainability is integrated into global development

efforts.

We can learn from the previous Millennium Development 7 report that said “MDG-7 focuses exclusively on

changes in the state of the environment rather than on the driving forces behind these changes. Some believe

that addressing these driving forces could yield greater gains for sustainable development (UNEP Post-2015

Discussion Paper 1, 2013).

This research emphasizes the importance of knowledge, attitudes, and stewardship in achieving environmental

sustainability. While understanding environmental issues is crucial, personal connection and active engagement

are equally necessary.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 169

www.rsisinternational.org

When our minds, hearts, and hands align, we can effectively protect and conserve our environment. By working

together in this way, we can strive to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.

Figure 4: Paradigm for Environmental Sustainability

The above paradigm serves as a guide to environmental sustainability in higher education institutions. From the

literature reviewed and the study's findings, one could conclude that for environmental education to be effective

and sustainable, it must be rooted in students’ environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental

stewardship. It is then important to determine students’ levels of environmental awareness, eco-consciousness,

and environmental stewardship, and to examine their relationships to assess their implications for environmental

sustainability, as this study confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results and discussions, the following are concluded:

1. Tertiary students at Saint Mary’s University possess a substantial and high level of environmental

knowledge, encompassing factual information and a thorough understanding of ecosystems, biodiversity,

environmental issues, and the effects of human activities.

2. Tertiary students at Saint Mary’s University demonstrate a strong eco-consciousness, which reflects their

awareness of the interconnectedness between humans and the environment, as well as a shared

responsibility towards the natural world.

3. Tertiary students at Saint Mary’s University exhibit strong environmental stewardship, reflecting their

responsible use, protection, and management of the natural environment through conservation and

sustainable practices.

4. At Saint Mary’s University, students display a connection between environmental awareness, eco-

consciousness, and environmental stewardship. As students' awareness and eco-consciousness improve, so

does their environmental stewardship.

5. At Saint Mary’s University, gender, age, type of high school they graduated from, and religion are not

influential or predictive of their environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental

stewardship, while school, year level, and ethnicity are influential or predictive.

6. School affiliation may influence students' environmental awareness and stewardship, with students from

the School of Health and Natural Sciences (SHANS) and the School of Engineering, Architecture, and

Information Technology (SEAIT) showing higher awareness and School of Health and Natural Sciences

(SHANS) demonstrating greater stewardship.

7. While students' environmental knowledge and stewardship are unaffected by year level, eco-consciousness

is influenced, with more advanced students generally exhibiting higher levels.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 170

www.rsisinternational.org

8. While ethnicity does not determine environmental awareness and eco-consciousness, it may play a role in

shaping environmental stewardship behaviors.

9. Saint Mary’s University is a fertile ground for environmental sustainability practices as the students have a

high level of environmental awareness, eco-consciousness, and environmental stewardship, which are

important dimensions of environmental sustainability.

10. Based on the findings and conclusions, the following are recommended:

For Saint Mary’s University to:

i. Sustain and intensify its programs, projects, and activities that lean towards protecting and conserving

the environment.

ii. Create environmentally related activities that would cater to the needs of those in the lower years,

including those coming from the school of teacher education and humanities and the school of

accountancy and business.

iii. Intensify the CHSF program, the Green Campus Project, and its community partnerships for ecological

protection and conservation activities, as they are several of the means to multiply ecological

stewardship practices in society.

For future researchers to replicate the study in other schools, particularly in public higher educational institutions.

Disclosure on the Use of Generative AI

This article used generative AI solely to enhance language clarity and coherence, without altering the original

research findings or interpretations.

REFERENCES

1. Al-Faleh, H & Baker Al Serhan (2022). Students' awareness of sustainable environmental development

and its impact on their intention to implement the eco-school program in their schools in Jordan.

ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

2. Al-Suqri, M. & Rahma Mihammad Al-Kharusi (2015). Ajzen and Fishbein's Theory of Reasoned Action

(TRA). Information Seeking Behavior and Technology Adoption: Theories and Trends. DOI:

10.4018/978-1-4666-8156-9. ISBN13: 9781466681569.

3. Baer, W. (2019). Introduction to cognitive action theory. Journal of Physics: Conf. Ser. 1251 012008

4. Baer, W. (2020). Conscious Action Theory: An Introduction to the Event-Oriented World View.

Routledge, New York.

5. Bennett, N. et. al. (2018). Environmental Stewardship: A Conceptual Review and Analytical Framework.

Environmental Management Aims and Scope. Volume 61, pages 597–614.

6. Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Double Day Book.

7. CHSF (2023). Clean, Healthy, Safe, and Friendly (CHSF) Environment Manual. Saint Mary’s

University. Unpublished edition.

8. Das, S. et. al (2014). Awareness of School Students about Sustainable Development in Education.

International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research: An Enlightening Online Open Access,

Refereed & Indexed Journal of Multidisciplinary Research. Volume -1 Issue -10, June 2014.

9. DeChano, L. (2006) A Multi-Country Examination of the Relationship Between Environmental

Knowledge and Attitudes, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 15:1,

15-28

10. Driscoll, C. et. al. (2012). Science and Society: The Role of Long-Term Studies in Environmental

Stewardship. BioScience 62: 354–366.

11. Dzhamalova, B. et. al. (2019). Research of Student Ecological Intention Development Level. Ekoloji

Dergisi, 2019, Issue 107, p289.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 171

www.rsisinternational.org

12. Falkner, R. & Barry Buzan (2019). The emergence of environmental stewardship as a primary institution

of global international society. European Journal of International Relations 2019, Vol. 25(1) 131–155.

DOI: 10.1177/1354066117741948.

13. Goodland, R. (1995). The concept of environmental sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and

Systemantics. Vol. 26, 1-24.

14. Grazianoa, M. (2022). A conceptual framework for consciousness, Proceedings of the National Academy

of Sciences, Vol. 119 No. 18 .

15. Hazelkorn, E.; Ryan, C.; Beernaert, Y.; Constantinou, C.P.; Deca, L.; Grangeat, M.; Karikorpi, M.;

Lazoudis, A.; Pintó; R.; Welzel-Breuer, M. Science Education for Responsible Citizenship; Report to the

European Commission of the expert group on science education. European Commission: Brussels,

Belgium, 2015.

16. Huckle, H. (1991). Education for sustainability: Assessing pathways to the future, Australian Journal of

Environmental Education 7, 43 – 59.

17. Hungerford, H. and Trudi Volk (1990). Changing Learner Behavior through environmental Education.

Paris, UNESCO.

18. Japanese Society of Environmental Education (JSOEE) (2016), Goals of Environmental Education in

Japan, Retrieved on June 2016 from

www.jsoee.jp/oldver/english/index.html

19. Jensen, B. & Karsten Schnack (1997). The Action Competence Approach in Environmental Education,

Environmental Education Research, 3:2, 163-178, DOI: 10.1080/1350462970030205.

20. Kanerva, T. (2006). Developing Eco-consciousness: A critical exploration of the Ontario Grade 12

“Environment and Resource Management” course. A thesis presented to the University of Toronto.

21. Kahn, A. et. al. (2024). A Multidimensional exploration of university students’ sustainable consumption

and environmental awareness in Pakistan. Journal of Management Info. Vol 11, No. 1.

22. Laiphrakpam, M., et. al. (2020) Environmental education and awareness among students in India, Japan

and Thailand for sustainable development. Journal of Thai Interdisciplinary Research, Volume 14,

Number 2, Pages 48 – 53.

23. Maslang, K, et. al. (2022). Securing a Clean, Healthy, Safe and Friendly School Environment: Context of

a Private Higher Education Institution in the Philippines. Journal of Positive School Psychology. Vol. 6,

No. 3.

24. Meadows, D. (1990) Harvesting One Hundredfold. Kenya, United Nations Environment Programme.

25. Meusburger, P., Benno Werlen , Laura Suarsana (2006). Knowledge and Action. Klaus Tschira

Symposia Knowledge and Space, vol. 9.

26. Molsher, R. & Mardie Townsend (2015). Improving Wellbeing and Environmental Stewardship Through

Volunteering in Nature. EcoHealth, 13 (1), December. DOI: 10.1007/s10393-015-1089-1.

27. Nelles, G. L., & Ressler, M. B. (2023). Youth eco-consciousness and environmentalist identity

development at a summer camp. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education,

19(2), e2308. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/13052.

28. Okada A., Gray P. (2023). A Climate Change and Sustainability, Education Movement: Networks, Open

Schooling, and the ‘CARE-KNOW-DO’ Framework. Sustainability 14(24).

29. Okada, A. (2023). CONNECT open schooling networks for Climate Change and Sustainable Education

supported by the CARE-KNOW-DO framework. The Open University, UK.

30. Ramsey, C. & Roy Rickson (1976). Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes. Journal of Environmental

Education. Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 10-18.

31. Rogayan, D. & Eveyen Elyonna Nebrida (2019). Environmental Awareness and Practices of Science

Students: Input for Ecological Management Plan. International Electronic Journal of Environmental

Education, Vol.9, Issue 2, 2019, 106-119.

32. Sarkis, J. & Qingyun Zhu (2018). Environmental sustainability and production: taking the road less

travelled, International Journal of Production Research, 56:1-2,743-759, DOI:

10.1080/00207543.2017.1365182.

33. Takyi, A., et. al. (2023). Creating eco-consciousness from the perspective of students: an assessment of

the level of environmental literacy among students in Kumasi. International Research in Geographical

and Environmental Education, Volume 32, 2023 - Issue 4.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 172

www.rsisinternational.org

34. Tilbury, D. (1995). Environmental Education for Sustainability: Defining the new focus of

environmental education in the 1990’s. Environmental Education Research, vol. 1, No. 2, 195-212.

35. UNESCO (1992). UN Conference on Environment and Development: Agenda 21. Switzerland,

UNESCO.

36. UNEP (2013). UNEP Post-2015 Discussion Paper 1. Version 2 19 July 2013. Available at

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/972embedding-environments-in-SDGs-v2.pdf

37. Vallerand, et al., (1992). Ajzhen and Fishbein’s theory of reasoned action as applied to moral behavior:

A confirmatory Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. vol. 62, no. 1, 98-109.

38. Welchman, J. (2012). A Defence of Environmental Stewardship. Environmental Values 21 (2012): 297–

316. The White Horse Press. doi: 10.3197/096327112X13400390125975.