Diverse voices, shared goals: stakeholder perspectives on environmental education effectiveness in UAE universities

Purpose This study examines diverse stakeholder perceptions of the effectiveness of environmental education in universities across the United Arab Emirates (UAE), situated within the country's broader sustainability and higher education policy context, including UAE Vision 2071. Design/methodology/approach Using Q methodology as an application of stakeholder theory, the research captures subjective viewpoints from academic, professional and community groups to identify distinct discourses that represent varied conceptions of program success. Findings Five distinct discourses emerged: (1) pragmatic innovators, who emphasise measurable outcomes and technological integration; (2) community-focused traditionalists, who value local engagement and established pedagogical methods; (3) global sustainability advocates, who promote international perspectives and climate action; (4) technical competency builders, who prioritise professional skill development; and (5) holistic experience seekers, who highlight transformative personal learning. These discourses map different ways participants in this purposively selected P-set conceptualised environmental education effectiveness; they do not estimate the prevalence of these viewpoints in the wider UAE stakeholder population. Research limitations/implications The study focuses on a selection of UAE universities, which may limit transferability to other national and institutional contexts. Q methodology reveals the structure and range of perspectives but does not measure their prevalence in the wider stakeholder population. Its cross-sectional design captures views at a single point in time, despite evolving environmental challenges and policy agendas. The 40-statement Q-sample, though carefully constructed, represents only a subset of possible viewpoints. Future work should include longitudinal, outcome-linked and cross-cultural studies to test the stability, impact and broader applicability of the identified discourses. Practical implications Universities can use the five discourses as a stakeholder-informed framework for curriculum design, strategic planning and quality assurance in environmental education. Administrators are encouraged to adopt portfolio assessment systems capturing multiple indicators (technical, global, community, experiential) and to institutionalise participatory governance mechanisms. Faculty can design flexible curricular blocks and diverse pedagogies – ranging from technology-enhanced learning and internships to community-based and experiential approaches – aligned with different discourses. Policymakers can support institutional diversity and sustained stakeholder engagement through funding schemes and incentives that recognise plural conceptions of effectiveness. Social implications By foregrounding diverse stakeholder perspectives, the study supports more inclusive, culturally responsive and socially just environmental education in the UAE. It highlights tensions between technocratic, employment-focused models and community-rooted, holistic and transformative priorities, surfacing issues of power and representation in educational decision-making. Integrating critical pedagogy, ecojustice and decolonial perspectives, the study argues for environmental programs that honour local knowledge, address socio-environmental inequities and cultivate empowered, critically conscious graduates. Such programs can enhance social cohesion and ethical stewardship while advancing the UAE's long-term sustainability vision. Originality/value The study contributes to sustainability education literature by providing an empirically derived, multi-stakeholder map of how environmental education effectiveness is understood within the UAE higher-education context. Participants' post-sort accounts also show that these viewpoints are interpreted within a national policy environment in which sustainability leadership, workforce preparation and Emiratisation are salient considerations. The five-discourse typology is not presented as a validated benchmarking instrument; rather, it provides a theoretically grounded basis that could inform the future development and validation of evaluation or benchmarking tools.