Education for Sustainability can be initiated following diverse paradigms and frames of reference that define problems and propose solutions differently. These perspectives raise critical questions about whose viewpoints are normalised and whose are marginalised. This has important implications for interdisciplinary and collaborative work, as students and educators often navigate competing worldviews across different localities. Without careful engagement, approaches transferred across regions can create an “education-reality gap”, particularly where western individualist assumptions clash with collectivist traditions (find out more here) or Local and Indigenous Knowledge Systems. In this regard, Vogel et al. (2023) highlight the need for critically reflexive, participatory approaches that move from one-way “science for society” models toward more reciprocal “science with society” practices, allowing multiple knowledge systems to co-exist. The table below outlines five distinct worldviews for sustainable development, each offering different entry points to frame EfS.
Table: Five competing worldviews for sustainable development (adapted from Vogel et al. 2023 after UNRISD, 2012; Mochizuki and Yarime, 2016: 14–15)
Table: Five competing worldviews for sustainable development (adapted from Vogel et al. 2023 after UNRISD, 2012; Mochizuki and Yarime, 2016: 14–15)
| Worldview | Views of sustainability | Approach to sustainability problems |
|---|
|
Capitalism with a Green Face
|
Economic growth creates capacity for sustainability.
|
Crises in the system to be resolved through top-down crisis management (rather than crises of the system).
|
|
Sustainable Development as Defined by the UN
|
Strong states and institutions bring governance mechanisms.
|
Ongoing fragmentation and blind spots around global institutional governance require top-down intervention.
|
|
Social Economy
|
Rebalancing global inequalities and restructuring capitalism brings justice.
|
Capitalism as the primary driver of injustice. Bottom-up global coalitions to reject business as usual and refocus on ethics and justice.
|
|
Limits to Growth
|
The impossibility of limitless growth given the limited ecological capacity of Earth.
|
Top-down enforcement; degrowth or no-growth and alternatives to GDP. Bottom-up valuing of nature.
|
|
Sustainable Cities
|
Cities as systems with design considerations for utilities, waste, and construction.
|
Sustainable investment and design. Bottom-up and top-down multi-stakeholder approaches.
|
In this video, Dr Abby Innes (LSE European Institute explores how teaching political economy offers opportunities for students to question mainstream economic paradigms and reveal the obstacles to addressing the ecological crisis from a different angle. Link to video.