Geoethics and Sustainability: Addressing Challenges in Environmental Education for Achieving the SDGs

Abstract

Geoethics, which explores the ethical implications of Earth sciences, requires a philosophical effort to deepen our understanding of the field. Sustainability, particularly in the context of the energy transition, necessitates a critical examination of the limits to societal development. While advancing new forms of energy production is crucial, it is equally important to investigate the ethical boundaries of such studies. This article addresses the question: how can environmental education, in the context of sustainability and geoethics, respond to the challenges posed by SDG Goals 3 and 4? These goals—Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages, and Quality Education—are fundamental for preserving global living conditions. This study explores how environmental education can tackle sustainability issues from an ethical standpoint, focusing on geoethics as a key dimension. Using bibliographic research, exploratory and critical analysis as method, the paper examines the intersection of geoethics and sustainability, with particular emphasis on the ethical dimensions of energy transition. The findings underscore the urgent need to improve education—especially in schools—to prepare children and young people to navigate the ethical limits of sustainability. A secondary outcome of this paper is to highlight the critical role of ethics in shaping environmental education for a sustainable future.

1. Introduction

The relationship between humanity and nature has always been complex and contradictory. While earlier societies often demonstrated a sense of stewardship toward the environment, the scientific revolution of the 17th century marked a decisive break. This era heralded the idea that human beings could, and indeed should, exert control over the natural world [1]. However, this pursuit of mastery, which fueled advancements across scientific fields, simultaneously triggered a process of environmental degradation—primarily through the exploitation of natural resources. As humanity’s attempts to dominate nature grew, so did the degradation of the planet, leading to urgent discussions on the need to rethink and halt this destructive trajectory, which now threatens the very conditions necessary for life on Earth.

In this context, [2] warned of the dangers of unchecked consumerism, which exacerbates the exploitation of natural resources. The urgency to curb the widespread destruction of forests, rivers, and ecosystems is increasingly recognized. Brazil occupies a key position in these global discussions, not only due to its responsibility for protecting the Amazon rainforest but also because of its leadership in advancing clean energy solutions. The upcoming COP30, the 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to be held in Belém, PA, in 2025 [3], highlights Brazil’s central role in shaping the global environmental agenda.

One promising framework for addressing these challenges is the field of geoethics, which integrates geosciences with ethical reflection. Geoethics provides an opportunity to explore environmental issues through the lens of fundamental values such as dignity, responsibility, justice, and respect for both humanity and nature. Since much of the research in earth sciences is conducted by scientists, geoethics becomes an essential platform for reflecting on the ethical implications of human actions that impact the natural world [4].

Sustainability, however, is often discussed within geopolitical contexts that prioritize fragmented knowledge systems and the industrial application of science. Moreover, in today’s interconnected and globalized world, local and global decisions profoundly influence environmental outcomes. While some scholars argue that the concept of sustainability lacks historical grounding or is incompatible with the current economic system [5], others suggest that subordinating technical solutions to ethical considerations offers a viable pathway for addressing environmental challenges [6]. This study adopts an integrative perspective on sustainability, conceptualizing it as a set of guiding principles that encourage responsible decision-making at both local and global levels. These principles emerge from a redefined ethical-pedagogical framework, which calls for a fundamental shift in how sustainable practices are conceived and implemented.

In light of this, it is essential to examine how knowledge is produced, critically assess the limitations inherent in specific analytical perspectives, and understand how these perspectives influence decision-making. The concept of sustainability cannot be divorced from the political, economic, and anthropological forces that shape global transformations—forces that often prioritize economic growth, market freedom, and interdependence in a globalized trade network.

The exploratory nature of this study is central to its approach. By exploring the intersection of environmental education, sustainability, and geoethics, this article aims to provide a deeper understanding of how these fields can address the challenges posed by the targets outlined in SDG Goals 3 and 4. Through an exploratory methodology, the study seeks to investigate, analyze, and synthesize existing literature, empirical data, and theoretical frameworks. This approach allows for an open-ended investigation that aims not only to answer specific research questions but also to generate new insights and perspectives on how sustainability and geoethics can be integrated into environmental education policies. The methodology is designed to foster a comprehensive examination of the complexities surrounding energy transition, sustainability, and educational policy, while also highlighting the critical issues and challenges involved in transforming current practices.

The article is structured in three main sections: first, it provides an analysis of geoethics as a foundation for Sustainable Development in Health and Education with a particular focus on the recent work “Shallow vs. Deep Geoethics: Moving Beyond Anthropocentric Views” [7]; second, it delves into the theme of sustainability, with a focus on energy transition, particularly in relation to SDG Goals 3 and 4; and finally, it presents the key challenges faced by environmental education in the context of these global discussions, ultimately proposing pathways for future action.

2. Geoethics: A Foundation for Sustainable Development in Health and Education

Geoethics engages in discussions on public and planetary ethics, serving as a cornerstone for sustainable environmental practices. It opposes anthropocentric morality, advocating instead for ecocentric principles that emphasize the interconnections among humans, the non-human world, and nature as an integrated whole [7]. By embedding ecocentric ethics in scientific inquiry and education, geoethics fosters an ethical framework crucial for sustainable development.

At its core, geoethics examines the values underpinning human actions in relation to nature. It addresses ethical, social, cultural, and educational dimensions, bridging disciplines such as sociology, philosophy, and economics to facilitate a multidisciplinary approach to sustainability and the energy transition [8,9]. This integration is vital in achieving SDG 3 by promoting healthy environments, which directly impact human well-being, and SDG 4 by ensuring quality education that prepares future generations to tackle global challenges responsibly.

Geoethics is a subset of environmental ethics [10] that critically examines humanity’s interactions with nature. It provides philosophical and practical frameworks for the sustainable use of natural resources, ensuring that geoscientific practices remain conscious of their environmental and societal impacts. Ref. [11] emphasize the importance of “ecological humanism,” which harmonizes responsible anthropocentrism with respect for the non-human world. This perspective aligns with the goals of SDG 3 by highlighting the interconnectedness of environmental and human health and underscores the necessity of SDG 4 through its emphasis on ethical education.

The themes of geoethics include:

(a)

Advancing rigorous scientific research on sustainability, environmental ethics, and the energy transition.

(b)

Defending human rights while fostering respect for nature.

(c)

Encouraging sustainable policies and practices.

(d)

Promoting public access to geoscience information and its societal role.

(e)

Highlighting the ethical responsibility of geoscientists to advocate for sustainable development.

(f)

Inspiring education systems to reflect ecological and ethical practices that benefit both individuals and the global community [12].

The role of geoethics in education, as advocated by [11,13], includes integrating ethical principles into curricula to cultivate geoscientists and professionals equipped to address global challenges such as climate change, natural disasters, and resource management. This fosters an ethical culture within scientific communities and beyond, ensuring that the next generation adopts sustainable and socially responsible practices, in line with SDG 4.

The transition from “superficial” to “deep” geoethics marks a critical evolution. While superficial geoethics focuses on professional ethics within geosciences, emphasizing immediate responsibilities, deep geoethics broadens this perspective. It incorporates ecocentric principles that value all life forms and natural elements, challenging the human-centered approaches that have limited responses to global crises [7].

Geoethics champions an ethical paradigm that integrates respect for cultural and natural diversity with sustainability, responsibility, and justice. It underscores the role of geoscientists as custodians of the Earth, advocating for practices that prioritize the planet’s well-being and the equitable treatment of all communities. This ethical framework supports SDG 3 by fostering healthier environments and communities and contributes to SDG 4 by embedding these principles in education systems, cultivating a generation of ethically informed global citizens.

By embracing geoethics, societies can promote an ethics-driven approach to environmental challenges, bridging professional practice and public policy to achieve a sustainable future for both humanity and the planet.

3. Sustainability

The international focus on Sustainable Development and Environmental Education gained momentum in the 20th century through global conferences, events, and collaborative discussions. This concern reflects a growing awareness of the environmental crisis at both local and global scales, driven by socio-economic, technological, demographic, and ecological tensions. Qualitative critiques of consumerism and individualism underscore their roles in exacerbating environmental challenges, prompting calls for urgent and coordinated responses [14]. Early warnings by organizations like the Club of Rome and subsequent international declarations emphasized the environmental crisis’s links to broader social and economic inequalities, establishing sustainability as a key focus of global governance and education [15].

The mobilization of global civil society, particularly around themes such as the energy transition and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), has reinforced the centrality of education and well-being in achieving sustainability. Education is increasingly seen as a transformative tool that connects ethical and pedagogical principles with practical decision-making, fostering the knowledge and skills necessary for addressing complex global challenges. This aligns with SDG 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all, enabling societies to adapt and thrive in an interconnected world.

Moreover, the UN’s Stockholm [16] and subsequent reports, including the Brundtland Report [17] and the World Declaration on Education for All [18], emphasize that addressing the environmental crisis requires tackling poverty, illiteracy, and inequality. These interconnected issues are pivotal to promoting human development and well-being, the essence of SDG 3. A holistic approach to sustainability—integrating economic, social, and environmental dimensions—is critical for equitable development that respects planetary boundaries and ensures the health and well-being of current and future generations.

Education and health are inalienable human rights that underpin sustainable development. Without access to quality education, societies face significant barriers to fostering informed citizens who can participate in the equitable transformation of economic, political, and environmental systems. Similarly, without prioritizing health and well-being, as advocated in SDG 3, communities cannot achieve their full potential, perpetuating cycles of poverty and vulnerability. International declarations have recognized that these rights are interdependent, with failures in one area inevitably impacting progress in others.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the fragility of health and education systems worldwide, underscoring the urgent need for resilient public policies that prioritize these sectors. The pandemic disrupted education for millions, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, and jeopardized years of progress toward SDG 4. Similarly, the global health crisis emphasized the critical role of robust healthcare systems in safeguarding communities from future shocks.

Sustainability education, as a critical element of SDG 4, requires a rethinking of educational paradigms. It must transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries, fostering an interdisciplinary approach that integrates the natural and social sciences with cultural, ethical, and philosophical perspectives. Such an approach enables learners to critically engage with complex global issues, including the interconnections between environmental degradation, economic growth, and social inequality.

Sustainability is inherently tied to ethical considerations, particularly the balance between anthropocentric and ecocentric perspectives. While modern development paradigms have often prioritized economic growth at the expense of ecological and social systems, sustainability demands a shift toward values that emphasize interdependence, equity, and long-term resilience. This shift is crucial for fostering a culture of environmental stewardship and collective well-being.

To achieve the SDGs, particularly Goals 3 and 4, it is essential to promote integrated approaches that address health, education, and sustainability in a unified framework. Policymakers, educators, and civil society must collaborate to ensure that education systems equip learners with the knowledge and skills to address environmental challenges, promote health and well-being, and advocate for equitable and sustainable development. Key strategies include:

• Strengthening Public Policies: Invest in universal access to quality healthcare and education, ensuring that these systems are resilient and inclusive, especially during crises.
• Fostering Ethical Education: Embed sustainability and ethics into curricula, encouraging critical thinking about the interdependence of human and natural systems.
• Encouraging Innovation: Support interdisciplinary research and technological innovations that address sustainability challenges while fostering equitable growth.
• Promoting Global Solidarity: Recognize the interconnectedness of global challenges and prioritize international cooperation to share knowledge, resources, and best practices.

The interdependence of health, education, and sustainability underscores the necessity of addressing these issues comprehensively. By aligning efforts with SDG Goals 3 and 4, the global community can advance toward a sustainable and equitable future, ensuring well-being for all and empowering generations to come.

4. Challenges for Environmental Education

We cannot ignore the critical role of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in shaping the future of global living conditions, particularly Goals 3 and 4. These goals—ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all, and providing quality education—are vital for fostering sustainable futures. As such, integrating these goals into the framework of Environmental Education (EE) becomes essential for achieving global sustainability.

EE is inherently tied to SDG 4, Quality Education, as it encompasses a dimension of education that must foster both individual and collective transformation. By promoting education that bridges the connection between human beings and the environment, EE encourages a shift in understanding from seeing the environment as a mere resource to be exploited, to recognizing it as a shared responsibility to be protected for the benefit of all. This transformation is aligned with Goal 3, Health and Well-being, as a healthy environment directly influences human well-being, and both goals aim to foster conditions that allow all individuals to thrive, physically, mentally, and socially.

The foundation of EE is based on recognizing the current environmental and humanitarian crises that the global community faces. Advocating for education that can alter the harmful relationship between humans and their environments is not only a matter of ethical urgency, but also a practical necessity for achieving long-term well-being and sustainability. As [19,20,21] emphasize, this requires an education system capable of rethinking environmental engagement to advance citizenship and actions aimed at a dignified coexistence that prioritizes the common good.

In line with SDG Goal 4, EE aims to offer a comprehensive education to students, helping them exercise their citizenship while promoting conscious, responsible consumption of natural resources. By fostering an understanding of sustainability and the conservation of both human and non-human life, EE nurtures a learning process that is integral to social development and environmental health—critical components for SDG 3.

The importance of integrating EE into all levels of education (from Basic Education to Higher Education, Special Education, and Adult Education) is recognized not only in Brazilian law but also in the broader international context. This approach ensures the continuous, articulated, and inclusive implementation of EE across all educational spaces—formal and informal—giving students the tools to critically engage with and positively impact their environment. The National Policy for Environmental Education (PNEA) in Brazil, as outlined in Law No. 9.795/99, sets a clear framework for the development of an integrated understanding of the environment, ensuring that EE remains a key pillar in the formation of citizens committed to sustainability.

In this light, EE is not just an isolated subject but a transversal element that should be embedded across all educational stages and disciplines, aligned with SDG 4’s emphasis on inclusive, equitable, and quality education. Furthermore, the goals of SDG 3 and SDG 4 underscore the role of education in mitigating the impacts of environmental degradation on health. By fostering a deeper connection between environmental stewardship and public health, EE can help alleviate the social determinants of health by promoting a cleaner, healthier environment, and more equitable access to resources.

Ref. [22] highlight how pedagogical trends have often viewed the environment through an instrumental lens, where it serves primarily as a resource for education. However, a more integrated approach to EE, as advocated by [23], emphasizes the interdependence of human and environmental health, which is central to SDG 3 and 4. This perspective recognizes the ethical and social dimensions of the environment, which go beyond ecological conservation to include the social, racial, and gender equity issues necessary to achieve healthy lives and well-being for all.

Incorporating these ideas within EE can promote critical thinking and systemic change—from individual behaviors to societal structures—toward the long-term objectives of SDG 3 and SDG 4. This approach not only addresses health concerns linked to environmental degradation but also educates individuals to be proactive in finding solutions for a sustainable and healthy future.

Ultimately, EE must be understood as a dynamic and reflective process that fosters critical and ethical engagement with the environment. By embracing its role in promoting health, well-being, and quality education, EE can empower individuals to take informed actions that support the SDG 3 and SDG 4 objectives—creating healthier societies and sustainable, equitable futures for all.

This section emphasizes the crucial role of Environmental Education (EE) in promoting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 3 (Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages) and Goal 4 (Quality Education). These goals are essential for maintaining global living conditions, as they address both individual well-being and the societal need for quality education.

EE, as outlined by Brazilian legislation [24,25,26,27,28], is seen as a purposeful and intentional process that should be integrated into the national curriculum. This integration should transcend traditional, siloed teaching methods, adopting a transdisciplinary approach that tackles themes such as nature, sustainability, and the environment. The aim is to move beyond anthropocentric, depoliticized, and conservationist viewpoints, fostering a broader understanding of the complex relationship between humans and the environment. This vision requires a critical-reflective perspective that links ethics, education, and social practices.

However, the effective implementation of EE in schools—whether in Basic Education or Higher Education—faces significant challenges [24,25]. On the one hand, scientific activities related to EE have been expanded, with interdisciplinary debates bringing together diverse fields. Yet, on the other hand, there is growing tension between scientific research and the logic of economic accountability within universities. Increasingly, individualism and monetary concerns threaten to destabilize the humanistic, social, and environmental values central to EE. This challenge is especially pronounced as knowledge production in universities becomes more focused on quantifiable, rationalized outputs, which can undermine the critical, transformative purpose of education.

The shift toward a more scientific and technological approach—coupled with the virtual and globalized nature of knowledge dissemination—has heightened concerns about how this knowledge is applied. The lack of adequate preparation among educators—whether in Basic Education or university settings—further complicates the integration of EE in pedagogical practices. Educators may not be adequately equipped to translate EE research into actionable strategies for their students, leading to a gap between the theoretical and practical aspects of education.

To overcome these challenges, teacher training becomes essential. The praxeological perspective in education, which emphasizes the inseparability of theory and practice, is vital for bridging the gap between knowledge and its real-world application. This perspective fosters a deeper understanding of the human condition and calls for a rethinking of how epistemological frameworks shape both teaching and learning processes. This includes interdisciplinary collaboration, where different sciences are brought together not only to fulfill EE’s objectives but also to address broader educational goals.

Moreover, the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC) [24] and National Curricular Guidelines (DCNs) [25] in Brazil support this approach by promoting the interdependence between different areas of knowledge and the need to move beyond the fragmentation of disciplines. However, for this interdisciplinary approach to succeed, there must be proper teacher preparation to facilitate meaningful connections between diverse areas of study. Without it, EE risks being reduced to abstract concepts with little practical impact.

The school environment plays a pivotal role in achieving SDGs 3 and 4, as it directly influences the well-being of students and the quality of education. In many schools, however, activities that materialize the SDGs are still lacking. Thus, it is essential to focus on the integration of EE into the curriculum in ways that connect with both the health and well-being of students (Goal 3) and the pursuit of high-quality education (Goal 4). This connection should not only address environmental issues but also strengthen the link between education and sustainable development.

Incorporating Environmental Education effectively requires clear definitions, well-planned methodologies, and a systematic dialogue with other academic disciplines. Scholars like [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38] emphasize the need for a theoretical-methodological unity that strengthens the scientific rigor of the Educational Sciences. This unity ensures that EE’s integration into the curriculum is not only feasible but also impactful. The focus on interdisciplinarity and holistic teaching is essential for addressing the complex, interconnected issues of sustainability and human-environment relationships.

Ultimately, as EE fosters ethical awareness and addresses the broader human-social-environmental nexus, its goals align closely with the SDGs. The transformation of pedagogical practices in light of these challenges is crucial to ensuring that education meets the needs of both current and future generations.

5. Integrating Theory into Practice: Teaching Implications for Environmental Education and Sustainability

To bridge the gap between the theoretical insights of this work and practical applications, this section outlines strategies for educators to apply the concepts in Environmental Education (EE) and sustainability contexts. These approaches aim to facilitate meaningful learning experiences and empower educators to address environmental challenges effectively. This focus aligns with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 (Quality Education), which emphasizes inclusive, equitable, and quality education, and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), by promoting sustainable practices that support healthier environments.

a. Contextualized Learning Through Place-Based Education

Place-based education emphasizes local contexts, allowing students to connect theoretical concepts to real-world environmental challenges. This approach supports SDG 4 by fostering education that is relevant to local conditions and SDG 3 by raising awareness about environmental factors that affect community health. Educators can: design field activities that engage students with local ecosystems, such as community clean-up initiatives or biodiversity surveys; encourage students to investigate sustainability issues specific to their locality, fostering critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

b. Interdisciplinary Curriculum Design

Theoretical insights often span multiple disciplines. By integrating EE into other subject areas, educators contribute to SDG 4 through innovative and holistic education approaches. Interdisciplinary lessons also advance SDG 3 by addressing environmental determinants of health. Examples include: using mathematical models to analyze environmental data; exploring environmental themes in literature or art to foster emotional and cultural connections; collaborating with science and social studies to examine the intersection of ecological systems and societal impacts.

c. Role-Playing and Simulations

Simulated scenarios help students experience the complexities of sustainability decision-making. These activities prepare learners for active citizenship (SDG 4) and build awareness of policies affecting environmental health (SDG 3). Practical applications include: hosting role-playing exercises where students assume roles as policymakers, scientists, or community members; conducting mock sustainability negotiations to address issues like resource allocation, renewable energy adoption, or conservation planning.

d. Service-Learning Projects

Connecting theory to action, service-learning projects allow students to contribute to sustainability efforts, thereby enhancing SDG 4’s goal of lifelong learning and advancing SDG 3 through tangible community health improvements. Examples include: partnering with local organizations to develop and implement small-scale sustainability initiatives; encouraging students to design campaigns that promote environmental awareness within their communities.

e. Critical Reflection and Dialogues

Encouraging students to reflect critically on their experiences fosters deeper understanding and personal commitment to sustainability, reinforcing SDG 4’s emphasis on quality education and responsible citizenship. Additionally, these reflections can highlight the impact of environmental health, linking to SDG 3. Educators can: facilitate group discussions that link theoretical frameworks to students’ observations and activities; use reflective journals or multimedia projects to document personal growth and evolving perspectives on environmental issues.

f. Empowering Agency Through Project-Based Learning

Project-based learning enables students to take ownership of their education and develop practical solutions. These projects directly support SDG 4’s aim for skill acquisition and SDG 3’s focus on healthy environments. Educators can: guide students in creating actionable projects, such as designing green school initiatives or proposing solutions to local environmental problems; support students in presenting their findings to stakeholders, emphasizing real-world impact.

By incorporating these strategies, educators can make abstract theoretical concepts tangible and actionable. These approaches: foster critical and systems thinking skills, essential for addressing complex sustainability issues (SDG 4); engage students in meaningful learning experiences that connect the classroom to the real world (SDG 4 and SDG 3), encourage collaboration, creativity, and a sense of responsibility toward environmental stewardship (SDG 4) [39,40,41,42,43,44,45].

Integrating these practices aligns theoretical foundations with practical applications, enhancing the relevance and impact of Environmental Education and sustainability initiatives in diverse learning environments while directly contributing to the achievement of SDG Goals 3 and 4.

6. Final Considerations

It is important to underscore the critical insights presented by [7] in their work “Shallow vs. Deep Geoethics: Moving Beyond Anthropocentric Views”, which challenges the superficial treatment of geoethics and calls for a deeper, more nuanced engagement with the subject. The authors emphasize the need to transcend anthropocentric perspectives, a sentiment we echo in this study, particularly by highlighting the role of philosophy as an essential field for enriching the geoethics debate. Philosophy, and specifically the discipline of geoethics, offers a crucial framework for addressing the ethical implications of human interactions with the Earth.

This article, built around the question of how environmental education can address sustainability issues through the lens of geoethics, with particular focus on SDG Goals 3 and 4, provides a clear affirmative response but this is not enough. As shown in the previous sections, there is a strong argument for integrating ethical considerations into environmental education, especially in the context of energy transition and sustainability. However, it is equally important to reflect on the diversity of perspectives within environmental education and recognize the need for a consensus in the field. Given its status as a public policy domain, environmental education must move beyond polysemic interpretations, which can hinder efforts to address sustainability challenges effectively.

A key aspect of unifying these various approaches lies in the initial and ongoing training within basic education, where human development is foundational. This is where the role of ethics, particularly geoethics, becomes essential. As we emphasize in this paper, geoethics is not solely a matter for philosophers, but rather a crucial field shaped by the contributions of scientists, educators, and policymakers. The effort to unify disparate perspectives must be approached with care, as it risks undermining the autonomy of established groups that have long engaged with sustainability and geoethics. Therefore, building bridges through open dialogue, mutual respect, and continuous listening is imperative to strengthening the field and fostering meaningful change.

The methodological approach adopted in this study—an exploratory, bibliographical investigation—has proven valuable in critically analyzing existing debates around geoethics and sustainability. This methodology allowed for a comprehensive review of the theoretical foundations of geoethics, as well as its practical implications for environmental education. It is clear that one of the most significant challenges lies in mobilizing schools to design and implement activities that not only address environmental issues but also cultivate a deeper understanding of sustainability and ethics. The SDGs, particularly Goals 3 and 4, are strategic in this regard, as they not only focus on improving educational outcomes but also advocate for the social and environmental well-being that is essential in the context of global crises such as energy transitions, natural disasters, and environmental degradation.

Ultimately, we must maintain hope for social reconstruction and the protection of life on Earth. The future of humanity depends on our collective commitment to this cause. However, the debate on geoethics must extend beyond philosophers to include teachers and students, who are integral to shaping how we understand and engage with the world. As such, we critique [7] perspective, not to diminish their valuable contribution, but to underscore that geoethics should be viewed as a collaborative effort that embraces a broader, more inclusive approach [46]. The training of those in the educational sphere—especially teachers and students—should be centered around the ethical dimensions of sustainability, ensuring that they are equipped to navigate the complexities of the challenges ahead.