How do we want to live? Who does the economy serve? What role does education play in a socio-ecological transformation? What does global justice mean?
In attempting to answer these questions, people draw on the knowledge they have acquired through upbringing, experiences, and education. Ideas of what is (im)possible depend on what we consider normal. But normality is also relative and dependent on context. Normality is closely intertwined with cultural, political, and historical processes—and thus also with concrete power relations.
If global learning and education for sustainable development want to make a relevant contribution to a fairer and truly sustainable way of life and production, then, in my opinion, it is well advised to critically examine exploitative ways of life and production and their causes. This also means that global learning questions and continually adapts its own knowledge bases and perspectives – for these are not free from the cultural, political, and historical processes mentioned above. In this sense, there is no such thing as neutral education – merely a more or less transparent and reflective approach to one's own position.
Transformative education as critical-emancipatory global learning questions both its content and the way in which learning processes are taught and supported. On whose experiences, perspectives and knowledge bases is global learning carried out and developed? Who speaks and who doesn’t? Whose interests are represented and whose are not? What discriminatory stereotypes have I learned as a multiplier in this society and how can I unlearn them? How are various crises and forms of exploitation related to ways of life in the Global North – such as the climate crisis, colonial continuities, racism, gender inequalities and one's own (consumer) behavior? Such transformative education is transformative because it empowers and encourages people to form their own opinions and take their own positions. It goes beyond cognitive knowledge transfer and also addresses the emotional side of major, unsettling changes. Global learning in this sense is more oriented towards critical-emancipatory education and the didactic and knowledge resources that exist there. Both areas, global learning/ESD and critical political education, are still not sufficiently related to each other. If we consider issues of power and representation in global learning, we run less risk of reproducing belief and knowledge systems that support unsustainable and exploitative ways of life and production. This can also mean opening up discourses, reaching new target groups, building alliances with various social actors, etc. In contrast, all too often only knowledge about supposed sustainability is imparted – often in the sense of individual behavioral changes based on technological progress alone. However, the relevant framework documents, such as UNESCO’s current roadmap on ESD, strengthen critical-emancipatory elements. In order for transformative education to be truly possible, it is important that global learning does not stop at criticism, but rather puts approaches and examples from around the world up for discussion and makes them tangible, which are already trying out and devising solidarity-based forms of living and doing business. Only in this way will global justice within planetary boundaries become more conceivable and democratically negotiable. All of this requires psycho-emotional and social skills such as resilience, conflict resolution, and empathy, the activation and practice of which can also be part of global learning. Ultimately, socio-ecological transformation revolves around the question of what forms of material and social relationships we want to have with other people and nature, and how we shape these relationships – it is about how we structurally and culturally establish solidarity-based and sustainable ways of life that take into account diverse global as well as local conditions.
Published in: JUST ACTIVE Tackling Global Challenges Locally, edited by AWO International
