“Wicked problems” are complex to understand and challenging to teach. Our experience of teaching about environmental concerns in Aotearoa New Zealand suggests how these concepts are taught is more important for student learning than the nature of wicked problems themselves. By offering opportunities for students to co-develop their own situated knowledges about wicked problems, they can conceptualise and tackle them more effectively at their own pace and in their own experiential contexts. Here we identify and discuss approaches to teaching and learning that can be effectively applied to any wicked problem. We demonstrate a hopeful way to teach and learn about unwieldy and overwhelming issues that many of today’s undergraduates will inevitably be expected to confront in the future. This paper provides aframework to engage students in acourse, and tools for engendering active participation insituated and tangible learning experiences when teaching wicked problems. As lecturers teaching in aSchool of Environment in the disciplinary areas of geography, environmental science, science communication, and sustainability, we discuss the value and applications of these ideas across three levels of undergraduate teaching. We identify challenges that we have experienced and show how it is possible to turn these challenges into opportunities.

This article examines two large-scale public communication campaigns to explore the appropriateness and effectiveness of using one-way communication in contentious environmental issues. The findings show while one-way communication can be successfully employed in contentious issues, it is not appropriate for all contexts and may contribute to tensions between stakeholders. It concludes that agencies engaging in large-scale public communication campaigns involving complex and contentious environmental issues must understand the contexts in which they operate before determining their communication approach so affected communities can be both informed and engaged.

Park rangers hold a unique set of knowledge—of science, of publics, of institutional structures, of place, and of self—that should be recognised as valuable. For too long, models of the knowledge of scientists and publics have set people like rangers in an inbetweener position, seeing them as good at communicating, translating or negotiating from one side to the other, but not as making knowledge that is powerful in its own right. In this paper we argue that focus groups with park rangers across regional and conservation parks in Aotearoa/New Zealand reveal the complexity and multiplicity of rangers’ knowledge-making that shows the science-public model as incomplete. We argue further that the model is flawed for its focus on the making and holding of knowledge and not also on how it is enacted. Rangers, we argue, are responsible every day for making knowledgeable decisions for the health and well-being of parks and people. Making good decisions, though, requires not just knowledge but also care. An understanding of the many ways rangers know and enact their knowledge is important for biosecurity practice, especially in models of adaptive governance.

How, as researchers, do we recognise and address the implicit biases when engaging across multiple knowledge ecologies. In this paper, we consider the way historical and epistemic justice and injustice plays into our knowledge making when dealing with a specific issue: forest biosecurity. Specifically, we focus on the Aotearoa New Zealand context where knowledge making has been, and still is, dominated by a western paradigm, but where there is increasing discussion on mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) as a valid and valuable form of knowing. Drawing on the experiences of a transdisciplinary research programme that sought to examine the human dimensions of biosecurity aspects of the plant pathogens kauri dieback and myrtle rust, we approach our original question using the theoretical concept of epistemic injustice and draw on our experiences as a way to highlight instances and forms of epistemic injustice in the science-society relationship. We argue that the division of epistemic labour (into fields, disciplines, etc), and the ranking and assigning of relative epistemic credibility based on this division is a fundamental part of the western knowledge ecology which creates the necessary conditions for specific and potent forms of epistemic injustice. We contrast this by discussing how other knowledge ecologies, specifically mātauranga Māori, comfortably engages with a variety of knowledge and knowers and discuss the possibilities other knowledge ecologies offer.

Closure of a forest for biosecurity purposes led to the marginalisation and disconnection of Year 6 children from a local forest of significance to them in Aotearoa, New Zealand. The marginalisation of children’s voices and concomitantly of their knowledge, ideas, and values from environmental issues can be viewed as an example of epistemic injustice, which manifests widely in the environmental area, particularly in relation to marginalised groups. To counter this marginalisation and promote epistemic justice, we explored how the creative arts involving a child-driven environmental communication project could foster children’s sense of agency by supporting the protection of a local forest affected by a tree disease. We show that the creative arts could facilitate the children’s meaningful engagement in environmental issues in a learning environment that fostered child-centric approaches that enabled children to express their visions for sustainable futures in distinctly unique ways that were relevant to them. Furthermore, enabling the children to participate as environmental communicators re-established their relationship with their local forest and re-balanced the power structures that had led to the children’s sense of marginalisation. The insights on how this child-centred relational approach can promote epistemic justice and provide a meaningful contribution to the long-term sustainable management of forest ecosystems has implications for other marginalised groups.