Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ISDL

Learning

for Sustainable Development. TOGETHER.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ISDL

Institute for

Sustainable

Development and

Learning

DEAR READERS,

We, the Institute for

Sustainable Development

and Learning (ISDL), aim

to research and support

transdisciplinary learning

processes for sustainable

development.

With this brochure, we in-

form you about our work,

in which we systemati-

cally put the south–north

dimension at the core of

our activities and actively

contribute to the imple-

mentation of the Sustain-

able Development Goals

(SDGs).

Kick-off of the ISDL

A welcome address by the

president of Leuphana

University of Lüneburg,

Prof. (HSG) Sascha Spoun

Continue on page 2

“(…) sustainability science

is building a bridge be-

tween the world as it is

and the world as it ought

to be.”

A welcoming word from Prof. Dr.

Henrik von Wehrden, dean of the

Faculty of Sustainability.

Continue on page 7

Sustainability and

peace in education

processes through

the lens of the Earth

Charter

A reflection by

Mirian Vilela

Continue on page 9

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Table of contents

1: Introduction of the directors

2: ISDL at Leuphana University Lüneburg

Welcome address by the president of Leuphana University Lüneburg

7: Leuphana, ISDL, and UNESCO

A welcoming word from the dean of the Faculty of Sustainability

9: Sustainability and peace in education processes through the

lens of the Earth Charter

A reflection by Mirian Vilela

22: Expectations from the ISDL

An interview with Imme Scholz

25: Transdisciplinary learning to foster sustainable development

Institutionalizing co-engaged South-North collaboration

32: Declaration of Inception

35: The ISDL advisory board

39: ISDL members

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

“(...) we are living in a highly interconnected world with

prevailing injustices and at the same time full of creative

ideas and solutions.”

Daniel Lang

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Introduction of the directors

Dear friends and colleagues,

we officially inaugurated the

Institute for Sustainable De-

velopment and Learning

(ISDL) over a year ago. At that

time, and also when most of the contributions in this brochure was written,

nobody thought about COVID-19. Given the fundamental challenges as well

as the far-reaching consequences caused by this pandemic, it seems worth-

while to critically and honestly reflect on whether the vision and mission (see

declaration of inception, p. 32 ff) of such an institute are still meaningful and

relevant. We strongly believe that the two distinguishing features of ISDL, i.e.

its focus and commitment to advancing, realizing and enabling transdiscipli-

nary learning on an individual, organizational and societal level, and to do so

in mutual-learning processes between actors from the Global-South and the

Global-North are, and will be, more important than ever. The pandemic has

once more illustrated the fact that “we are living in a time of transformation”

that is full of uncertainties. This makes fixed planning for achieving pre-de-

fined goals that we want to reach within and through these transformations

often impossible. It has also highlighted that we are living in a highly intercon-

nected world with prevailing injustices and at the same time full of creative

ideas and solutions. Given this context, learning together from each other and

with each other across different contexts and guided by the idea of a sustain-

able development, is in our eyes a promising and essentially, necessary way

to truly “build-forward better,” and govern the transformations we are facing

towards a safe and just future. Thus, ISDL is more than ever committed to

contributing in fostering these learning processes in close collaboration with

its partners around the globe.

We hope you find some inspiring thoughts in this brochure that give hope in

these challenging times, and look very much forward to continuous learning

with you and from you in the coming years!

Daniel Lang

Matthias Barth

Gerd Michelsen

Daniel Lang

Matthias Barth

Gerd Michelsen

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ISDL at Leuphana University

Lüneburg

Welcome address by Prof. (HSG) Sascha Spoun,

president of the Leuphana University Lüneburg,

September 25, 2019

It is with great pleasure that we cel-

ebrate the inception of the Institute

for Sustainable Development and

Learning (ISDL) today. I am excited

to see that the new institute builds

upon the expertise that Leuphana

has developed over the years in the

fields of education for sustainable

development, transdisciplinary sus-

tainability research, and entrepre-

neurship research. The inaugura-

tion of the institute marks an im-

portant evolutionary step in the de-

velopment of Leuphana as an inter-

national hub for evidence-generat-

ing research on education for sus-

tainable development.

Research on the link between sus-

tainable development and learning

has a long tradition at Leuphana

University. This tradition can be

traced back as far as the year

1996, when the Department of En-

vironmental Sciences (“Fachbe-

reich Umweltwissenschaften”) was

founded at the former University of

Lüneburg. In fact, it was professor

Michelsen, who is now co-founder

of the ISDL, that drove the creation

of this department. Another im-

portant event in this respect was

when Prof. Michelsen was awarded

the UNESCO chair for Higher Educa-

tion for Sustainable Development in

2005. The chair contributes to the

theory and implementation of edu-

cation for sustainable development

and has made many important and

internationally recognized contribu-

tions to current debates in the area

of sustainable development. More-

over, the chair has established an

impressive network of institutional

partners globally. The establish-

ment of the first faculty of sustaina-

bility at a German university in

2010 was a further important step

in this order of events.

In many regards, Profs. Matthias

Barth and Daniel Lang, the other co-

founders of the institute, are build-

ing upon and extending Prof. Mi-

chelsen’s work. Prof. Barth started

as a student of environmental sci-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ences at the former University of Lü-

neburg and has since become a

leading figure in the field of educa-

tion for sustainable development.

Prof. Lang joined Leuphana in 2009

after his time as a researcher at

ETH Zürich. He has made important

contributions to the development of

the novel field of transdisciplinary

sustainability science and helps to

coordinate the joint sustainability

efforts of Leuphana and the city of

Lüneburg. It is a distinctive feature

of the research agendas of the

three directors of the institute that

transdisciplinary learning and sus-

tainability transformation pro-

cesses are examined on the individ-

ual, group, and societal levels. This

matches perfectly with our under-

standing as a university that strives

to educate individuals, promotes

mutual learning in groups, and sup-

ports reciprocal knowledge ex-

change between academia and so-

ciety.

The exchange between academia

and society plays an important role

in Leuphana’s endeavor to address

the problems and opportunities

that the 21

century holds for us.

Humanity is facing major chal-

lenges, such as climate change,

loss of biodiversity, plastic pollution,

and mass migration, to name but a

few. As this list shows, the main

challenges that we are facing today

are truly global. Unfortunately, the

isolated actions of single nations

will not be effective to stop global

warming or resolve migration is-

sues. Germany, for example, is re-

sponsible for only approximately

2,3% of global carbon dioxide emis-

sions. Even though the per capita

carbon dioxide emission in Ger-

many is relatively high compared to

that of other nations, a great reduc-

tion in Germany’s carbon dioxide

emissions alone would presumably

fail to have a noticeable effect on

reducing global warming. Further, it

has become almost a truism that

one country alone cannot solve the

migration crisis. International coop-

eration is key to tackle global chal-

lenges—or, to put it in other words,

global problems require global solu-

tions.

It is, therefore, a great pleasure to

see that the ISDL will contribute to

the quest for global solutions by

examining the efficacy of mutual

learning processes for sustainable

development among partners from

across the globe.

Leuphana University is a member of

various global sustainability net-

works, such as the Global Consor-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

tium for Sustainability Outcomes

(GCSO) and the International Sus-

tainable Campus Network (ISCN).

The ISDL is the ideal place to coor-

dinate and expand Leuphana’s ac-

tivities within these networks due to

its international orientation and res-

olute transdisciplinary agenda.

The institute’s emphasis on learn-

ing processes among individuals,

groups, and societies from the

“Global South” and “Global North”

is certainly a promising strategy. We

deliberately use the term “Global

South” instead of the somewhat

outdated notion of “developing and

emerging countries” because we do

not want to impose a euro-centric or

western-centric view of what good

development looks like upon other

nations. In the past, learning in the

context of sustainable development

has all too often been understood

as a one-directional affair involving

a “teacher” and a “receiver” or

“learner”. Representatives of afflu-

ent countries taught representa-

tives from economically weaker

countries what measures they

needed to take. This is not only frus-

trating for the receivers of these les-

sons but also lacks any rationale.

Countries, institutions, and individ-

uals from the Global North are not

in a good position to give the Global

South lessons on sustainable devel-

opment because they themselves

contribute a large share, in many re-

spects even the greatest share, to

global problems such as climate

change, plastic pollution, or mass

migration.

Rather than a teacher–student re-

lationship, we need representa-

tives from the Global North and

Global South to come together as

equal partners that learn from

each other and, thereby, develop a

mutual understanding of the most

effective measures to tackle the

commonly identified challenges.

I am pleased that the ISDL will serve

as a hub that examines and pro-

motes this type of knowledge ex-

change and mutual knowledge cre-

ation for sustainable development.

Mutual learning processes are key

in times of increasing societal polar-

ization. The Fridays for Future

movement expresses the relevance

of these questions to the public at

large. Yet, such protests are likely to

lead to resistance in parts of society

if they are brought forward in a tone

of “you have to change” or even of

“how dare you?”. What is needed is

an actual dialogue and mutual

learning among protesters and

other parts of society to prevent

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

such resistance and to find effec-

tive and innovative ways to counter

global warming. Measures against

global warming and other global

challenges can only be sustained

and effective in the long term if

large parts of our society subscribe

to and support them. In fact, large

parts of the global society need to

subscribe to them. By examining

how mutual learning processes for

SD work and what their conditions

of success are, the ISDL can serve

an important function in this regard:

It can create a database of methods

and best practices that will benefit

the quest for global solutions for the

global problems of our time.

It is my great pleasure that the

workings of the institute will be ac-

companied by an advisory board

that includes representatives from

academia, politics, and civil society

and that reflects the global orienta-

tion of the institute. The composi-

tion of this committee is truly im-

pressive. Rebecca Harms, for exam-

ple, has been a member of the Eu-

ropean Parliament for the Green

Party from 2004 to 2019 and has

served as president of The Greens—

the European Free Alliance group in

the European Parliament—from

2009 to 2016. Prof. Dr. Helga

Kromb-Kolb is a meteorologist who

headed the Center for Global

Change and Sustainability at the

University of Natural Resources and

Life Sciences in Vienna until her re-

tirement in 2018. The philosopher

Prof. Dr. Thomas Potthast holds the

chair for the Ethics, Theory, and His-

tory of the Life Sciences at the Uni-

versity of Tübingen and is a spokes-

man for the International Center for

Ethics in the Sciences and Humani-

ties. Prof. Emeritus Tan Sri Dato

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak is rector of the

International Islamic University, Ma-

laysia, and has served, along with

many other roles in university man-

agement, as an advisor to the World

Health Organization. Dr. Imme

Scholz is a sociologist and serves as

the acting director of the German

Development Institute. Mirian Vilela

is executive director of Earth Char-

ter International based at the Uni-

versity for Peace in Costa Rica,

which is commissioned by the

United Nations. Prof. Dr. Heila Lotz-

Sisitka holds a chair in Global

Change and Social Learning Sys-

tems at Rhodes University in South

Africa and specializes in research

on critical and generative methodol-

ogies, environmental learning, and

social change.

I am certain that this diverse com-

mittee of internationally recognized

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

experts can provide immensely val-

uable advice on the configuration

and advancement of the ISDL. Let

me emphasize that it is a great

honor for me to have been asked to

become a member of this advisory

board, as well.

Dear audience, I wish you a pleas-

ant inauguration event, which may

itself serve as a platform for mutual

learning and knowledge exchange,

providing all of us with new insights

and ideas.

“The inauguration of the institute marks an important

evolutionary step in the development of Leuphana as an

international hub for evidence-generating research on

education for sustainable development.”

Sascha Spoun

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Leuphana, ISDL, and

UNESCO

A welcoming word from Prof. Dr. Henrik von

Wehrden, dean of the Faculty of Sustainability

of Leuphana University Lüneburg

Leuphana University is working

hard to contribute to the solution-

oriented and critical, yet innovative,

development of academic research

and education. We are facing glob-

alization at its peak, where busi-

nesses are cheated by global play-

ers, institutions crumble, and moral

institutions are increasingly ques-

tioned. Nested within this global cri-

sis are endless localized crises that

may lead to a loss in institutions,

which an institution such as

Leuphana University also needs to

face.

In academia, we have the systems

knowledge that tells us about the

core pillars of knowledge, at least at

a level sufficient enough to inform

us that we need to act. Likewise—

and consequently—our normative

knowledge is increasing, although

there is much to catch up on. Trans-

formative knowledge is, however,

“what matters the most now”, to

borrow these words from the late

Derek Parfit. How do we acquire this

transformative knowledge? First,

we can do this through evidence

and through a discussion of what

evidence actually is.

Science is increasingly being ques-

tioned, and exchange and mutual

learning with society are more im-

portant today than ever before. We

need to create knowledge that is

both basic and applied to overcome

the currently divided dogmas, and

this demands a critical reflection on

what science can be in these chal-

lenging times. Luckily, we can build

on institutions that are widely es-

tablished and innovative on a vast

scale and that focus on such timely

topics.

UNESCO is such an institution since

it takes on both global and local

challenges with a rich and diverse

tradition. Integrated into this long

tradition, this new institute at

Leuphana University is attempting

to reflect, dialogue, and research.

The exchange between the Global

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

South and Global North will be chal-

lenging for a long time, but we want

to contribute to bridging the gap be-

tween these two hemispheres and

their fruitful knowledge traditions.

We make this choice with the

knowledge that this is a long-term

goal and a conscious choice in

these challenging times. To quote

Martha Nussbaum, “hope really is a

choice and a practical habit”. By es-

tablishing this institute at Leuphana

University, we are following her ad-

vice, thereby contributing to the vi-

sion that sustainability science is

building a bridge between the world

as it is and the world as it ought to

be.

“The exchange between the Global South and Global

North will be challenging for a long time, but we want to

contribute to bridging the gap between these two

hemispheres and their fruitful knowledge traditions.”

Henrik von Wehrden

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Sustainability and peace in

education processes

through the lens of the

Earth Charter

A reflection by Prof. Mirian Vilela, executive director of the Earth

Charter International Secretariat and the Center for Education for

Sustainable Development at UPEACE, Costa Rica

For the past 15 years, among other

things, I have been teaching sus-

tainable development and educa-

tion for sustainable development to

graduate students of peace studies

and peace education. This has of-

ten given me the opportunity to en-

ter into the “world” of people who

are interested in learning about

peacebuilding, conflict resolution,

or peace education with the pur-

pose to help them understand the

concept of sustainability and its

linkages with their areas of interest.

I must admit that I do this with the

hope that, eventually, they will “fall

in love” with the sustainability field

(my passion) and see how it can

contribute to the world of peace-

building and prevention.

I am not always successful in mak-

ing this happen. Often, at the end of

a course, I hear students express

that although they very much en-

joyed learning new content and the

course experience, they plan to ded-

icate their lives to peacebuilding or

humanitarian processes. This is

fine, of course, but when I hear

them affirming that the comprehen-

sive approach to sustainability, en-

vironmental protection, or the sys-

temic approach to decision making

is a complicated luxury that many

cannot afford, with the decision to

dedicate efforts to peacebuilding as

a priority, I realize that there was

something wrong with the learning

process that I attempted to instill.

The fact is, when this happens, the

opportunity to help people see the

linkages among conflict, environ-

mental distress, and unsustainable

development were somehow

missed. The process lacked a trans-

formative learning experience,

meaning a change of frame and

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

perspectives. The point is that the

effort should not be placed on

whether the field of peace studies is

more important than that of sus-

tainability, nor the other way

around, but rather to stress the

nexus between them.

Worldviews, values, and beliefs

This leads me to think that probably

the biggest obstacle for humanity in

acting towards addressing the cur-

rent challenges we face has to do

with our worldviews, mindsets, and

fragmented views of reality. This in-

volves our capacity to see things

from various perspectives, the hid-

den connections and the underlying

values that motivate and guide our

actions, and to question our as-

sumptions. Our worldviews often

make us blind or shortsighted and

limit us from evolving. We can no

longer afford to continue to see

things from the surface or from a

single angle, making assumptions

and acting upon them. We must

broaden our viewpoints to see be-

yond our closest communities and

reality.

Let me explore this a bit more. If we

take a careful look over human his-

tory, we could identify that through-

out time, there have been waves of

political discourse that were em-

bedded in our social construction

and education system (formally or

otherwise) and that made us be-

lieve that we need to protect “our-

selves” against the “other” or that

we cannot trust, nor collaborate

with, the “outsider”. Consequently,

this made us see those who are out-

side of our close circles or commu-

nity borders, those who are differ-

ent (or think differently), or who

could be racing for the resources

that we have, as “bad” or “evil”. This

has blocked our capacity to collabo-

rate or engage in dialogue with and

learn from “the other”.

Thus, it is important to be aware

and critical of our worldviews and

to ask ourselves where these be-

liefs come from and what impact

they have on our decisions and so-

cieties.

Frequently, the above-illustrated sit-

uation is generated by the infor-

mation that we received during our

upbringing that (indirectly) stressed

self-interest, competition, and na-

tionalism. This type of mindset pre-

supposes that we are independent

of others, that the “unknown” (or

collaborating with them) is not good

for us, and, to a certain extent, that

we are superior to others. This is

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

why we ought to think about the im-

portance of learning history from

different versions or angles of

“truths”. Regardless, I often think

that we all should learn that our

concern for human security and the

wellbeing of all living beings should

supersede any concern with the se-

curity of a state, territory, or single

group. By this, I mean that new hu-

man evolution requires us to be will-

ing to expand our borders of care

and responsibility in such a way that

we are concerned not only with our

closest family or the specific local

community we belong to but also

with the wellbeing of humanity and

living beings as a whole. Indeed,

this requires openness and willing-

ness to shift our mindsets and

worldviews.

Much of how we see “the other”, the

neighbor, communities, or other

countries depends on how history is

taught from our context, as well as

on what, and from whom, we hear

the stories and news. I have often

heard testimonies akin to the one of

a young graduate student from In-

dia who grew up hearing that Paki-

stani people were bad. Her context

shaped her vision towards Paki-

stanis until she met one personally

and had the opportunity to really get

to know the “unknown” and see

“the other” as another human be-

ing. In her testimony, she said that

thanks to the fact that she was out-

side of her context and had the op-

portunity to develop a human con-

nection, she changed her percep-

tion of Pakistan and the way she

saw people from Pakistan.

Our cultural “borders” are socially

constructed, which means that we

can deconstruct them and con-

struct something new.

What are the beliefs and assump-

tions we have that deserve to be

questioned? How can we create

space for this sort of questioning to

take place?

I often wonder whether the current

education system is helping to per-

petuate the current paradigm of un-

sustainability, such as by nurturing

a worldview of human–nature sep-

aration and separation among “us”

and “them”. Or is it cultivating a cul-

ture of care and respect for the

large living world?

This question emerges given the

fact that in all regions of the world,

more people have access to formal

education, at least in comparison

with 100 or even 50 years ago; how-

ever, there has also been an in-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

crease in the depletion of natural

resources, social distress, and, we

could also say, individualism. It is

crucial that education processes

take on the protagonist role of so-

cial transformation towards a civili-

zation that has a planetary vision of

responsibility and care for the well-

being of all. The roles of education

and our worldviews are essential in

realizing this.

We can say that there is a predomi-

nant worldview that makes us be-

lieve in the human–nature–produc-

tion systems separation. Again,

much of this depends on the infor-

mation we receive, what we hear,

and how we experience the world

around us. Depending on how lim-

ited or diverse our circle of interac-

tions and access to information are,

our angle of vision could be broader

or narrower, making us see the

world differently.

Moreover, I would argue that the

current system of dominance and

unsustainability actually benefits

from having the majority of people

not seeing the whole, not looking at

the various angles, and not ques-

tioning the underlying assumptions

of what we are taught to believe.

Not having a “20/20 vision” makes

us more ineffective in contributing

to systemic social change. If most

people in our society have a partial

or myopic vision of our planet (such

as how natural and social systems

work), as well as of our economic

systems, it is easier to continue with

the status quo, as it nurtures a nar-

row sense of responsibility and care

for the wellbeing of all.

On worldviews, values, and as-

sumptions, many years ago, Mead-

ows (2009) came up with an ice-

berg model as a useful instrument

to guide systemic thinking and to

help us become aware of the

worldviews and values underlying it.

We need to make room to go

through this type of reflection.

academyforchange.org

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Sustainable development and the

peace nexus

Traditionally, the agendas and con-

cepts of peace and development

have been considered to be sepa-

rate. This is primarily due to our

need to categorize things into

“boxes”: areas of knowledge, insti-

tutional frameworks, and budgets.

It is a matter of fragmented world-

views. Sometimes I think it is also a

matter of feeling part of a commu-

nity of knowledge, to which we are

loyal and to which we have a strong

sense of belonging, that blocks our

capacity to build bridges with “oth-

ers”.

However, this has been changing.

Increasingly, more people are real-

izing that our local and global chal-

lenges, as well as our social and en-

vironmental challenges, are inter-

connected; therefore, an integrated

approach is required. In addition,

people are realizing that moving so-

ciety towards sustainability (in a

broad and advanced way) will di-

minish the possibilities of violent

conflict.

The Earth Charter (2000) and the

United Nations 2030 Agenda of

Sustainable Development Goals

(2015) managed to put sustainable

development and peace into one

framework. The United Nations

2030 Agenda envisions its imple-

mentation with an integrated ap-

proach considering people, the

planet, prosperity, and peace

(United Nations General Assembly

2015). In this context, over 10

years ago, the United Nations Envi-

ronment Programme (UNEP)

started a project to make this nexus

visible and issued numerous re-

ports that looked at a) the role of

natural resources and the environ-

ment in conflict; b) the impacts of

conflict on natural resources and

the environment; and c) the role of

natural resources and the environ-

ment in peacebuilding.

Based on various case studies,

these UNEP studies made evident

that environmental problems have

fueled many violent conflicts, as

they increased people’s struggle to

access clean water, food, and sani-

tation, but also that many conflicts

have had a significant impact on

the environment. The recognition of

Sustainability Peace

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

the nexus of violent conflict/war–

environment degradation–social

and economic injustices is of the ut-

most importance to prevent and ad-

dress such challenges. We must

continue to highlight that conflicts

and wars generate significant envi-

ronmental degradation, which con-

sequently leads to more conflict,

and on the other hand, that there

are many cases where scarcity and

the unequal distribution of natural

resources, as well as environmental

stress (such as drought and water

scarcity), have sparked conflict.

Along these lines, UNEP (2009) rec-

ommends including natural re-

sources and environmental issues

into the peacekeeping and peace-

building processes’ strategies and

to increase the UN’s capacity for

early warning and early action re-

garding this. They argue, and I

agree, that this is not an option but

a security imperative. We could also

look at the role education plays in

addressing this.

Education on/for sustainable devel-

opment, peace, and planetary citi-

zenship values

When it comes to the realization of

sustainability and peace, education

plays an essential role, although it

is often undermined in comparison

to the attention given to other poli-

cies, such as those of technological

innovation. Nevertheless, this is not

about any type of education; this

has to be education for social trans-

formation: a type of education that

is transformative and that expands

our consciousness concerning our

interconnectedness with all and

with the role we must play in con-

tributing to social betterment and

the common good. This means

something different from conven-

tional education.

The “for” in “education for sustain-

able development” quite clearly

differentiates between education

about sustainability and education

for sustainability.

This represents a challenge for all

to rethink education and reorient

our efforts to really make education

a driver for social transformation to-

wards a more sustainable and

peaceful world. We need to dare

and figure out how to adapt and re-

orient our educational practice to

the current times, even if we have

to completely reinvent the practice

of education. We indisputably need

an urgent revolution in the way we

approach education and there is

not much time for this.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

For this, we can build on the fact

that the UN 2030 Agenda recog-

nizes the “role of education as a

main driver of development and in

achieving the other proposed

SDGs.” SDG 4 elevates the im-

portance of education by setting the

goal of “ensuring inclusive and eq-

uitable quality education and pro-

moting lifelong learning opportuni-

ties for all”. This, at least, can be

seen in the commitments of inter-

national policies. Now, it is time to

make this happen in the class-

rooms and to be innovative in think-

ing about what quality education re-

ally means. It is time for universi-

ties, schools, research institutes,

and organizations working in non-

formal education to take a bold step

in the direction of reinventing them-

selves and adjust their practice to

the reality we are facing in the 21

century.

More specifically, when looking at

the nexus of education, sustainabil-

ity, and peace, we should seek ways

to move forward with the implemen-

tation of SDG 4.7, which seeks to

“ensure all learners acquire the

knowledge and skills needed to pro-

mote sustainable development, in-

cluding, among others, through ed-

ucation for sustainable develop-

ment and sustainable lifestyles, hu-

man rights, gender equality, the

promotion of a culture of peace and

nonviolence, global citizenship, and

an appreciation of cultural diversity

and of cultures’ contribution to sus-

tainable development”.

In doing so, it is essential to under-

line the linkages between quality

education and education for sus-

tainable development. I would say

that if education for sustainable de-

velopment is really implemented

through a participatory process that

is contextual, meaningful, and

transformative, as desired, it should

be considered quality education.

Gadotti (2010) believed that “the

concept of sustainability contrib-

utes to the construction of a new

quality in education”. In addition, it

is crucial to find synergies and build

bridges among the various types of

education for social transformation

identified in SDG 4.7.

According to the Incheon Declara-

tion and Framework for Action for

the implementation of SDG 4,

“quality education fosters creativity

and knowledge and ensures the ac-

quisition of the foundational skills

of literacy and numeracy, as well as

analytical, problem-solving, and

other high-level cognitive, interper-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

sonal, and social skills. It also devel-

ops the skills, values, and attitudes

that enable citizens to lead healthy

and fulfilled lives, make informed

decisions, and respond to local and

global challenges through educa-

tion for sustainable development

and global citizenship education

(GCED)”. It is important that we do

not miss the opportunity that the UN

2030 Agenda presents. This should

not be limited to education about

sustainable development or the

SDGs.

If we really are to realize the above,

we should clarify what these skills,

values, and attitudes of education

for sustainable development and

GCED are. Are the values of educa-

tion for sustainable development,

GCED, or peace education the

same? What could be the differ-

ence? How can we make them

more visible without imposing

them, and how do we realize educa-

tion on sustainability and global cit-

izenship values?

I agree with Sterling (2010) when

he said that less attention should

be paid to different forms of educa-

tion for change, adjective educa-

tion, or “labels, and more to mean-

ing and values informing educa-

tional thinking and practice”. We

should figure out a way to avoid

making the efforts of education for

social change compete among

themselves for attention and fund-

ing.

In this context, Toh and Cawagas

(2010) enlightened us with their

metaphor, “three currents, one

river,” with which they invite us to

see peace education, education for

sustainable development, and the

Earth Charter (and I would add

GCED) as currents in the same river

flowing towards a similar goal. They

indicated that they saw many com-

monalities in purpose, values, and

practices through these different

“currents”. Given this, efforts that

are in the same river, flowing to-

ward the aspired ocean, would ben-

efit by collaborating and building on

synergies.

The question remains: What val-

ues are underlined, embedded, or

taught in the processes of teach-

ing–learning? What are the values

of sustainability and global citizen-

ship?

The Earth Charter worldview as an

instrument of education and dia-

logue

The Earth Charter (2000) is the re-

sult of a multi-cultural and multi-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

sectoral global dialogue on shared

values and principles that can guide

humanity towards a more just, sus-

tainable, and peaceful world. It ar-

ticulates a broad and comprehen-

sive vision of how we, as a global so-

ciety, amid our cultural diversities,

ought to live together on this shared

planet. As such, it is considered to

be a common ethical framework

that can be used as a reference in

decision and policymaking, as well

as in efforts toward education for

sustainable development, GCED,

and peace education. The Earth

Charter dares to make the values

and principles of sustainability and

global citizenship visible. Its legiti-

macy comes from its comprehen-

sive content, inclusive drafting pro-

cess, and the use that is has been

given, as it has been embraced, as

a sort of “ethical compass” by a

large number of groups from all re-

gions of the world. UNESCO, for in-

stance, has recognized it as an im-

portant framework for sustainable

development and an educational in-

strument (UNESCO Resolutions

Conference, reference 32C/17

(2003) and 40C/80 (2019)).

The worldview articulated in the

Earth Charter emphasizes the inter-

dependence and systemic nature of

our values and various local and

global challenges, as well as the im-

portance of addressing them

through an integrated approach,

which means looking at the rela-

tionships among various problems.

The preamble to the Earth Charter

calls for us to see that “everyone

shares responsibility for the present

and future wellbeing of the human

family and the larger living world”.

This assertion is a way to articulate

the important notion of universal re-

sponsibility. The Charter’s 16 princi-

ples are organized into four parts:

respect and care for the community

of life; ecological integrity; social

and economic justice; and democ-

racy, nonviolence, and peace.

They involve, among others, the im-

portance of “eliminating discrimina-

tion in all of its forms”, “gender

equality and equity”, “transparency

and accountability in governance,

inclusive participation in decision

making, and access to justice”.

earthcharter.org

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

As per its vision, the aspirations to

achieve environmental protection,

development, and peace are inter-

dependent, and, to a certain extent,

peace comes as a result of social

and economic justice and ecologi-

cal integrity. Hence, from this per-

spective, it is understood that to

build enduring peace and a culture

of peace, it is necessary to ensure a

healthy environment, as well as so-

cial and economic justice. This is

why its final principle calls for pro-

moting “a culture of tolerance, non-

violence, and peace”. The definition

of peace in the Earth Charter high-

lights the importance of relation-

ships; we can see this in Principle

16f, which states, “recognize that

peace is the wholeness created by

right relationships with oneself,

other persons, other cultures, other

life, Earth, and the larger whole of

which all are a part”.

Therefore, from this perspective, a

core element to consider when ad-

dressing conflict and striving for

peace and sustainability is to estab-

lish and nurture right relationships

among all of these different dimen-

sions “with oneself, other persons,

other cultures, and the larger living

world that we are all a part of”.

Chowdhry (2005) affirmed that the

Earth Charter proposes a new para-

digm for development, a people-led

development, a development which

is pro-poor, pro-nature, and pro-

woman. She added, “if the voice of

the Earth Charter is to become a liv-

ing reality, then the starting point of

change is with oneself. If we cannot

change ourselves, we cannot

change the world. We need the in-

ner strength to be able to say to our-

selves and the world, ‘My life is my

message’”.

Most people go through an educa-

tional experience without learning

principles for the common good and

systems-thinking skills, which can

be useful tools to address any so-

cial challenge or conflict.

Education at all levels should

deepen people’s understanding of

the importance of looking at the

relationship among a healthy envi-

ronment, healthy people, and the

wellbeing of the community of life

(not as conflictive but as compli-

mentary).

The Earth Charter offers a common

foundation and frames an inte-

grated approach to addressing the

systemic problems of our world and

can be used as an instrument to

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

clarify values, forge dialogues, and

develop a vision and collaboration

towards the common good.

The current planetary phase we live

in requires some flexibility and

openness to move away from our

own perspective, position, or self-in-

terest and embrace a planetary citi-

zenship mindset. It requires an ed-

ucational experience that helps us

to cultivate healthy relationships

with other human beings and with

the greater community of life on

Earth. An educational effort that

uses the Earth Charter as an instru-

ment should be concerned with the

importance of value clarification

and orientation of the learner to

shift from a fragmented and self-

centered approach to a broad, inte-

grated, life-centric approach. It di-

rects us to question whether our ed-

ucation practice and systems are

helping to cultivate a sense of re-

sponsibility for ourselves, our local

community, and organizations only,

or if they are also helping to expand

a sense of care and responsibility to

the common human family and the

large living world.

Lastly, I would like to point out two

other elements that are necessary

to help us move ahead with efforts

to realize education for sustainable

development, peace education,

and GCED:

1) Dialogue

Education for social transformation

should offer a space for us to think

and dialogue about how to “form a

global partnership to care for Earth

and one another” amid our differ-

ences, find common ground, and

learn to overcome our national, cul-

tural, and economic interests to

achieve the common good. This re-

quires us to generate space for on-

going dialogues about shared val-

ues that can guide us on how we are

to live in this “common” home, our

planet Earth. Hence, the im-

portance of dialogue is evident, and

not shallow dialogue but deep dia-

logue, dialogue that offers a safe

space to share different perspec-

tives and values, that brings differ-

ent groups together, that generates

useful information about our

worldviews, assumptions, and the

issues that may be generating con-

flict, that helps builds trust and,

consequently, collaboration, and

where all parties can exercise active

listening and confident expression.

With this, we ought to realize that

listening is the most important part

of communication. This is an im-

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

portant skill that is missing from our

education system. If we do not pay

attention and learn how to listen to

what the other parties are trying to

communicate (in different ways), it

will be challenging to resolve any

conflict. Active listening requires us

to constantly calm our own

thoughts and be willing to inter-

vene. It also means not only listen-

ing to what the other person is say-

ing through words but also perceiv-

ing the intonation of their words and

body language.

It is good to remind ourselves that

we do not have to agree with others

on everything or always reach the

same conclusion regarding priori-

ties. However, we need to learn to

respect others and their different

points of view and strive to find

common ground regarding how we

ought to live on this planet.

Thus, local and global dialogues

on values and ethics should be at

the very center of our macro strat-

egies, as the lack thereof is at the

core of most global problems.

2) A systemic approach

Ensuring a systemic approach for

addressing any challenge and con-

flict is essential, as it helps us to

see the whole picture (and not just

a piece of it). This can also be con-

sidered as relational thinking and

as the opposite of fragmented and

short-term thinking. Traditionally,

we are used to analytic and reduc-

tionist thinking, which processes

and understands things by taking

them apart. A question for the edu-

cation system is to what extent are

we enabling learners to strengthen

their systems-thinking capacities?

Are we enhancing learners’ capaci-

ties to build bridges among differ-

ent areas of knowledge and exper-

tise? Hopefully, our education sys-

tems will help us to approach peace

and sustainability not as separate

agendas but as one.

As the Earth Charter states, this

new phase of human civilization re-

quires “a change of mind and heart

… a new sense of global interde-

pendence and universal responsi-

bility”. It will require our resolve to

“find ways to harmonize diversity

with unity, the exercise of freedom

with the common good, short-term

objectives with long-term goals”. It

is up to us to act accordingly.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

“When it comes to the realization of sustainability and

peace, education plays an essential role, although it is

often undermined in comparison to the attention given to

other policies, such as those of technological

innovation.”

Mirian Vilela

Reference

Chowdhry, K. (2005). The spiritual way, the Gandhian way. In Corcoran, P., Vilela, M., and Roerink, A. The Earth Charter in

action: Toward a sustainable world. KIT Publishers, Amsterdam

Earth Charter Commission. (2000). The Earth Charter. San José, Costa Rica: Earth Charter International. Available at

http://www.earthcharter.org (Accessed 27 January 2020).

Gadotti, M. (2010). Reorienting education practices towards sustainability. In Clugston, R., and Vilela, M. (eds.) Journal of

Education for Sustainable Development. Vol. 4 No. 2. SAGE Publications

Meadows, D. (2009). Thinking in systems. Earthscan, United Kingdom. And the iceberg model.

http://donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Final-Iceberg-Model.pdf

(Accessed 27 January 2020)

Sterling, S. (2010). Living in the Earth: Towards an education for our times. In Clugston, R., and Vilela, M. (eds.) Journal of

Education for Sustainable Development. Vol. 4 No. 2. SAGE Publications

Toh, Swee-Hin, and Cawagas, V. (2010). Peace education, ESD, and the Earth Charter. In Clugston, R., and Vilela, M. (eds.)

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development. Vol. 4 No. 2. SAGE Publications

UNESCO. (2003). UNESCO 32

General Conference 32C/17

UNESCO. (2015). Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the implementation of Sustainable

Development Goal 4. Available at http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-frame-

work-for-action-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf (Accessed on 27 January 2020)

UNESCO. (2019). UNESCO 40

General Conference 40C/80

United Nations Environment Program. (2009). From conflict to peacebuilding: The role of natural resources and the envi-

ronment. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya

United Nations General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. UNGA,

New York, USA. Available at https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E (Accessed 27

January 2020)

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Expectations from the ISDL

An interview with Prof. Dr. Imme Scholz,

deputy director of the German Development

Institute (DIE), Germany

One of the objec-

tives of the new institute is to con-

tribute to the implementation of the

SDGs through research, capacity

mobilizing, and policy advice.

Where do you see the biggest chal-

lenges and most pressing actions

to achieve the SDGs?

It is very difficult to make a choice—

these 17 goals are there for a rea-

son. It also makes a difference if

you choose a global, local, Euro-

pean, or individual perspective. My

choice of three would be limiting cli-

mate change and adapting to it, re-

ducing inequalities in income, ac-

cess, and inclusion, and changing

production and consumption pat-

terns towards decent work and

closed resource cycles (circularity)—

all this at home and globally

through intensified and improved

global cooperation. A fourth chal-

lenge is learning to understand pol-

itics and policymaking for sustaina-

bility transformations.

From your experience and perspec-

tive, what are some of the promis-

ing initiatives and activities that

have come up lately?

The Covid-19 pandemic. It’s devas-

tating social and economic impacts

and the uncertainty surrounding it

make it very difficult to look into the

future. Still, the mobilization to-

wards “building back better”, which

we can see both in the political

sphere and in society, is vital for not

losing any more time in getting

transformative processes going.

The Covid-19 pandemic forces us to

face the immense social and eco-

nomic costs caused by deep and

growing inequalities, within and

across countries, as well as by an

economy that does not know eco-

logical limits.

What do you see as a potential for

an institute such as ISDL to make

an impact on society?

ISDL, as I understand it, combines

evidence-generating research re-

die

gdi.de

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

garding how specific problems re-

lated to sustainability and the trans-

formation process can be solved

with learning. Making advances re-

quires understanding where sys-

temic malfunctions come from, how

we are part of them, and how we

can become part of the change, and

it requires various forms of

knowledge—generated by aca-

demia, as well as by practice and

experience. This combination of re-

searching and learning can be of

significant service to the communi-

ties who participate in it, both for

training young researchers with this

novel approach and for helping the

worlds of science and practice re-

approximate with each other and

learn from each other.

What role does learning play in

such an impact?

Transdisciplinary collaboration is

impossible without learning, as are

transformation processes towards

sustainability. We need learning

processes that are not satisfied

with analysis alone but strive for de-

picting solutions, and we need re-

search that accompanies the imple-

mentation process so that learning

can further and build upon past suc-

cesses and failures. The world

ahead of us will be marked by very

dynamic changes that require us to

constantly adjust our knowledge

and behavior.

The South–North collaboration is

repeatedly stated as an important

enabler for sustainable develop-

ment to happen. However, there

are few examples where such col-

laboration works well and is sus-

tained sufficiently. What do you see

as the main obstacles here, and

how could they be overcome?

South–North collaborations need to

be based on shared objectives that

are of equal importance for all par-

ticipating institutions and persons.

The collaboration should be shaped

in a way that it accommodates the

needs of everyone related to these

objectives, and this should be done

in a participatory manner that is

simultaneously transparent about

the constraints that come along

with funding and institutional reali-

ties. It is probably most fruitful when

collaboration focuses on new prob-

lems that challenge all participants,

when there is not one answer but

many, and where the problem solu-

tion works best if these answers

share common elements.

It is great that the ISDL endeavors

to do its research and learning in a

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

place shared by people from the

Global South and the Global North.

Working for sustainability requires

that we learn to see ourselves as

members of humanity on a shrink-

ing planet and to develop a global

“we”-identity. ISDL can put this on

the agenda and the curriculum, al-

lowing us to explore the potential of

diversity, as well as the differences

in and sharing of worldviews,

needs, and convictions.

“ISDL (…) combines evidence-generating research on how

specific problems related to sustainability and the trans-

formation process can be solved with learning.”

Imme Scholz

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Transdisciplinary learning to foster

sustainable development

Institutionalizing a co-engaged South–North collaboration

Ways toward sustainable development will require mutual learning processes and pro-

cesses of change across disciplines and stakeholders and between the Global South and

North. The new ISDL aims to meet these requirements—through transdisciplinary learning

as evidence-generating and evidence-supported learning processes on the individual, or-

ganizational, and societal levels—thus fostering fundamental system transformations. It

invites scholars and other societal actors from the Global South and North to collaborate

and partner.

Matthias Barth, Daniel J. Lang, Gerd Michelsen

Transdisciplinary learning to foster sustainable development. Institutionalizing a co-en-

gaged South–North collaboration | GAIA 28/4 (2019): 382–385 | Keywords: education

for sustainable development, learning, South–North collaboration, transdisciplinarity

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.28.4.11 (CC BY 4.0)

Since sustainable development has

emerged as a normative guiding

idea at the global level, it has been

perceived as a “moving target”

(Hjorth and Bagheri 2006) that re-

quires deliberation and an ongoing

process of change. Accordingly,

there is emphasis on the crucial

need to find “ways of promoting the

social learning that will be neces-

sary to navigate the transition to

sustainability”. (Kates et al. 2001,

p. 642). Consequently, the notion of

learning for sustainability figures

prominently in both academia and

policy, and learning and education

https://en.unesco.org/themes/education-sustainable-develop-

ment/what-is-esd/un-decade-of-esd

are increasingly considered as im-

portant features in this regard

(Barth 2015). This is obvious when

looking at Sustainable Develop-

ment Goal 4 (ensure inclusive qual-

ity education and promote lifelong

learning opportunities for all) or the

manifold activities revolving around

Education for Sustainable Develop-

ment (ESD) under the umbrella of

the UNESCO Decade for ESD

and

the Global Action Program ESD

over the past 20 years. Yet, learning

has also been increasingly men-

tioned as a central concept to foster

sustainability transformations in

https://en.unesco.org/gap

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

the context of social learning pro-

cesses (e.g., Reed et al. 2010), real-

world laboratories and experiments

as learning and research settings

(e.g., Schäpke et al. 2018 or Singer-

Brodowski et al. 2018), or change

processes and capacity-building in

administration and other organiza-

tions (e.g., Keeler et al. 2019).

Transdisciplinary learning and sus-

tainable development

When it comes to learning and sus-

tainability, we see the concept of

transdisciplinary learning as partic-

ularly important. Learning, in this

sense, is a broad concept that en-

compasses many forms and needs

to be further clarified. This can be

done based on a distinction be-

tween two main dimensions: the

area of societal interaction and the

level of reflection informing learning

processes (Barth and Michelsen

2013).

For the social dimension of learn-

ing, we can distinguish three dis-

tinctive forms, ranging from indi-

vidual learning in a group, to learn-

ing as a group, to learning as a so-

cial change process that trans-

cends group boundaries.

Learning in all three areas can hap-

pen in three forms of learning, that

is, single-, double-, and triple-loop

learning—terms that refer to the

level of reflection that informs the

learning process (Argyris and Schön

1996). While different forms of

learning in the social dimension are

equally important, the progress to-

wards triple-loop learning plays a

crucial role in sustainability. Ulti-

mately, with triple-loop learning,

new ways of thinking are sought af-

ter, progressing from reflection on

how to do things differently towards

how to do different things.

This understanding of learning is

very closely linked to transdiscipli-

narity as a problem-and-solution-

oriented research practice that

plays a central role in sustainability

science (see, e.g., Lang et al. 2012).

This link becomes obvious, as a key

characteristic of transdisciplinary

research is mutual learning pro-

cesses among different scientific

disciplines, as well as between sci-

ence and society on equal footing.

In this sense, we conceptualize

transdisciplinary learning as evi-

dence-generating and evidence-

supported learning processes on

the individual, organizational, and

societal levels, fostering fundamen-

tal system transformations.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

The new ISDL

At Leuphana University Lüneburg,

the idea of transdisciplinary learn-

ing for sustainable development

has been developed, applied in di-

verse research projects, and used

for curriculum development on all

levels of education, particularly at

the UNESCO chair for Higher Educa-

tion for Sustainable Development,

for more than 20 years. Building on

this experience, in September

2019, the ISDL was officially inau-

gurated. As an inter-faculty body, it

strives to evolve into a national, as

well as an international, platform

that enables evidence-generating

research and supports the evi-

dence-based application of findings

in close collaboration with partners

from the Global South.

The goal of the new ISDL is to cre-

ate space for exchange, critical

and creative discussions, and the

joint activities of actors from the

Global South and the Global North.

To this end, it will systematically put

the South–North dimension of

transdisciplinary learning pro-

cesses in sustainable development

at the center of its activities and will

aim to actively contribute to the im-

plementation of the SDGs.

According to the areas of learning

on the societal dimension outlined

above, three-tier learning underpins

the institute’s work: individual edu-

cation processes, experience-

based cooperation, and societal in-

teraction.

Transdisciplinary learning through

individual education processes

In our research, we are interested in

processes and approaches that em-

power the individual to actively par-

ticipate in shaping sustainable de-

velopment within transdisciplinary

settings. Research on the respec-

tive learning processes can facili-

tate contributions toward shaping,

implementing, and developing

learning formats that encourage in-

dividual education processes, lead-

ing to sustainability-related skill-

sets.

Transdisciplinary learning through

experience-based collaboration

In this area, research focuses on

group learning and organizational

processes that contribute to the es-

tablishment of “communities of

practice”. The integration of differ-

ent stocks of knowledge opens the

discussion for the diversity and plu-

rality of theoretical and methodo-

logical perspectives, backgrounds,

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

and worldviews, as well as a variety

of perceptions of political and gov-

ernance design.

Research in this sector enables

the development of specific princi-

ples regarding how to shape ca-

pacity-mobilizing measures.

Consequently, it can directly con-

tribute to the establishment of sus-

tainable local as well as regional

communities of practice, which are

vital for sustainable development,

particularly in the Global South.

Transdisciplinary learning through

societal interaction

Here, we are interested in learning

processes that go beyond individu-

als and well-defined social entities

and their ability to initiate systemic

change for sustainable develop-

ment. Through a special focus on

the role of universities on the one

hand and the mutual learning pro-

cesses between science and soci-

ety on the other, insights into the

implementation of the SDGs shall

be gleaned. Thereby, evidence-

based progress in the implementa-

tion of the SDGs can be detected

and will enable consulting for the fu-

ture implementation of sustainable

development.

https://sustainabilityoutcomes.org

For all of these levels, we strive for

co-developing meaningful activities

to support evidence-based activi-

ties in research, capacity mobiliz-

ing, and agenda-setting. These ac-

tivities explicitly focus on long-term

impacts, address leverage points

for sustainable development, and

underline the relevance of transdis-

ciplinary learning processes to fos-

ter sustainability transformations.

Exemplary activities

The activities of the ISDL are usually

project-oriented and placed in con-

tent-focused spheres. Three sam-

ple projects are:

Actionable Sustainability Education

Across the Pacific with SolarSPELL

In this project on individual learn-

ing, specifically in the Global South,

funded by the Global Consortium for

Sustainability Outcomes

, we part-

ner with the Solar-Powered Educa-

tional Learning Library (So-

larSPELL

), a student-centered initi-

ative hosted at Arizona State Uni-

versity. The SolarSPELL digital li-

brary provides locally relevant,

open-access educational material

through an offline WiFi hotspot. It

mimics an online experience to

build information literacy and en-

www.solarspell.org

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

gage with sustainability-relevant

material. No external electricity, in-

ternet connection, or data is re-

quired for operation. Giving access

to the material in such a way, cou-

pled with teachers’ guidance in its

use, is expected to improve stu-

dents’ learning experience. By de-

veloping, testing, and implementing

meaningful educational material,

this project aims to contribute to

supporting the competence devel-

opment of those students from re-

gions most at risk when it comes to

climate change and hardest to

reach.

Towards a Sustainability University

Barometer

Organizational learning is sought af-

ter with the sustainability university

barometer, which aims at continu-

ously mapping the contribution of

the higher education sector to sus-

tainability and meeting the goals of

the 2030 Agenda on a global, re-

gional, and national scale. Besides

insights related to the 2030 Agenda

as such, it focuses on SDG 4 and is

informing the follow-up post-Global

Action Program for ESD. This will be

done in a twofold approach: the es-

tablished guiding principles indicat-

ing progress towards sustainability

are continuously observed (“cruise

mode”), while at the same time en-

abling factors for exploring new

pathways are also part of the ba-

rometer, as well as good practice

examples that allow for mutual

learning (“exploration mode”). The

barometer will include a set of indi-

cators that are measured in each

wave of inquiry (longitudinal), but

each wave also has a specific topi-

cal focus with more in-depth inquir-

ies. In contrast to other assessment

tools, the unit of analysis is not a

single higher education institution

(HEI) but the sector as such. To

reach this goal, the selection of in-

stitutions will be based on purpose-

ful sampling.

Globally and Locally Sustainable

Food–Water–Energy Innovation in

Urban Living Labs (GLOCULL)

In this project on societal learning,

funded by the European Union and

the Belmont Forum within the Joint

Programming Initiative of Urban Eu-

rope, seven universities from Africa,

South America, the US, and Europe

work together with several local ac-

tors outside academia at the loca-

tions of the respective universities.

The aim of these collaborations is to

foster sustainability transformation

through real-world experiments in

urban living labs (ULL).

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Transdisciplinary learning plays an

essential role in this project in at

least two ways: 1) within the differ-

ent ULLs as learning among the in-

volved actors from different societal

sectors and 2) across the different

ULLs to explore the possibility to

transfer and scale solutions, as well

as processes. For enabling these

learning processes, a formative,

evaluative scheme for real-world ex-

perimentation (Luederitz et al.

2017) has been specified for the

project context and will be applied

in all ULLs. Furthermore, collabora-

tively developed causal-loop dia-

grams will be used to allow for mu-

tual learning and bridging the gap

between contextualized learning in

the single ULLs and learning to gen-

erate transferable insights on a

general level.

All experiments in the GLOCULL pro-

ject focus on the water–food–en-

ergy nexus and range from small-

scale gardening projects in informal

settlements and craft-beer produc-

tion to the refurbishment of an ur-

ban neighborhood.

An open invitation

Transdisciplinary learning for sus-

tainable development cannot and

should not happen in silos, nor can

sustainability be reached by follow-

ing a competitive idea. Therefore,

ISDL is already embedded in and

closely linked to the activities of dif-

ferent networks, such as the NaWis

consortium or the Copernicus Alli-

ance. The goal of ISDL is to create

space for exchange, critical and cre-

ative discussions, and the joint ac-

tivities of actors from the Global

South and Global North who want to

advance transdisciplinary learning

as a means to foster SD. Everyone

interested in this endeavor is

warmly invited and welcome to join

us through collaboration and part-

nership in order to jointly make a

substantial contribution for a safe

and just future. To make the ethos

and commitment of ISDL for poten-

tial partners transparent, you can

find its Declaration of Inception be-

low.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

“The goal of ISDL is to create space for exchange, critical

and creative discussions, and the joint activities of actors

from the Global South and the Global North who want to

advance transdisciplinary learning as a means to foster

sustainable development.”

Barth, Lang, Michelsen

Reference

Argyris, C., D. A. Schön. 1996. Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Organization development series.

Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Barth, M. 2015. Implementing sustainability in higher education: Learning in an age of transformation. Routledge studies

in sustainable development. London: Routledge.

Barth, M., G. Michelsen. 2013. Learning for change: An educational contribution to sustainability science. Sustainability

Science 8/1: 103–119. DOI: 10.1007/s11625-012-0181-5.

Hjorth, P., A. Bagheri. 2006. Navigating towards sustainable development: A system dynamics approach. Futures 38/1:

74–92.

Kates, R.W. et al. 2001. Sustainability science. Policy forum: Environment and development. Science 292/5517: 641–

642.

Keeler, L. W. et al. 2019. Building actor-centric transformative capacity through city-university partnerships. Ambio 48/5:

529–538.

Lang, D. J. et al. 2012. Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: Practice, principles, and challenges. Sustaina-

bility Science 7/1: 25–43.

Luederitz, C. et al. 2017. Learning through evaluation: A tentative evaluative scheme for sustainability transition experi-

ments. Journal of Cleaner Production 196: 61–76.

Reed, M. et al. 2010. What is social learning? Ecology and Society.

Schäpke, N. et al. 2018. Jointly experimenting for transformation? Shaping real-world laboratories by comparing them.

GAIA 27/S1: 85–96.

Singer-Brodowski, M., R. Beecroft, O. Parodi. 2018. Learning in real-world laboratories: A systematic impulse for discussion.

GAIA 27/S1: 23

–

27.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Declaration of Inception

Adopted and signed in September 2019 by the ISDL Directors, the

President of Leuphana University, the Dean of the Faculty of

Sustainability of Leuphana University, and the members of the

ISDL Advisory Board

We acknowledge that we are living in a time of transformation. A range of in-

terconnected social, economic, cultural, and ecological changes are taking

place globally at levels never before seen. These changes not only threaten a

number of “planetary boundaries” in the long term but also bring the topic of

inter- and intragenerational justice to the fore: How can we ensure sustainable

development within safe and just boundaries?

We emphasize the fact that sustainability science shows an increasing capac-

ity for analyzing and understanding key challenges and their drivers. At the

same time, society is responding to these challenges by establishing a global

agenda of sustainable development goals. South–North relations and links

between global and local spheres are being reinterpreted and newly consid-

ered. However, the concept of sustainable development does not provide the

pathway or a distinctive solution that can be easily followed. Sustainability sci-

ence thus not only faces the challenge of generating an even more nuanced

understanding of sustainability problems but also needs to contribute to find-

ing and testing possible solutions.

We see the need for societal learning processes to address these challenges

and the inherent complexity therein. Different actors around the globe will

have to contribute to a transition toward sustainability. In so doing, universi-

ties will play an important role in and for civic society in the 21

century. They

will have to reconsider their roles and activities in order to contribute to finding

and testing solutions both for and with society.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

We recognize that the quest for methods to transition toward sustainability

involves constant mutual learning and negotiation. These processes take

place at the interface of science and society. Science, thus, needs to discover

new methods of communication and investigation, while society is being

asked to become open to such mutual learning processes. These learning pro-

cesses will take place between science and society, as well as between the

Global South and the Global North.

We understand that transdisciplinary learning is key to sustainable develop-

ment. Transdisciplinary learning occurs at three closely interlinked levels: 1)

the level of individual learning, in which key competencies for sustainability

are developed; 2) the level of organizational learning through experience-

based collaboration; and 3) the level of societal learning through social inter-

action.

III

We affirm our deep commitment to enabling and fostering transdisciplinary

learning processes. The co-creation of knowledge between science and soci-

ety and between the Global South and the Global North lies at the heart of our

activities. We will contribute to such learning by designing, implementing, and

evaluating learning processes, by building the capacity to do so, and by active

agenda-setting.

We act in three strategic working areas to live up to our commitment. Our re-

search focus lies in transdisciplinary learning for sustainable development,

and we aim to provide evidence-based insights into transdisciplinary learning

processes and their potential for sustainable development. By supporting

communities of practice and networks of local and regional experts in both

the Global South and the Global North, we actively mobilize the capacities of

change agents. We offer consultation and advice for actors from such fields

as policy, civil society, the economy, and administration regarding issues of

transdisciplinary learning for sustainable development.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

We invite key stakeholders in science, policy, the economy, and civil society to

an open dialogue on pathways leading to a transition toward sustainability.

Meaningful societal learning can only occur as a joint endeavor across bound-

aries and by thinking outside the box. It is our intention to establish the ISDL

as a facilitator of mutual learning processes across boundaries and as a sub-

stantial contributor to a safe and just future.

“We invite key stakeholders in science, policy, the

economy, and civil society to an open dialogue on

pathways leading to a transition toward sustainability.”

ISDL, Declaration of Inception

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

The ISDL advisory board

The advisory board was appointed

by the residential board of the

Leuphana University of Lüneburg

and provides counsel, expertise,

and strategic thinking to the Board

of Directors. The board also partici-

pates in efforts to raise the insti-

tute’s visibility and networking ef-

forts. It meets annually and is

chaired by the president of

Leuphana University. It is com-

prised of eight members, with at

least three representatives from

countries of the Global South.

Prof. Dr. Thoma

Pottha

Professor of the Ethics, Theory, and History of the Life

Sciences, University of Tübingen, Germany

Pro

. Helg

Krom

Former head of the Centre for Global Change and

Sustainability, University of Natural Resources and

Life Sciences (BOKU), Austria

Prof. D

Imm

Scho

Deputy director of the German

Development Institute (DIE),

Germany

Pro

Miria

Vile

Executive director of Earth Charter

International and the Earth Char-

ter Center for Education for Sus-

tainable Development, Costa Rica

Rebecca Harm

Former MP of the European

Parliament, Germany

Pro

. Tan Sri Dat

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

Rector, International

Islamic University, Malaysia

Prof. D

Hei

Sisitk

Distinguished research

professor, Rhodes University,

South Africa

Prof. (HSG) Dr. Sasch

Spou

President, Leuphana, University of Lüneburg,

Germany

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ISDL advisory board members

Rebecca Harms is a German

politician and member of the

Alliance 90/The Greens, part of the

European Green Party. She is a

vehement advocate of an ambitious

climate and energy policy and

sustainable development.

Prof. Dr. Imme Scholz is a

sociologist and the deputy director of

the German Development Institute.

Her fields of work include the 2030

Agenda for Sustainable

Development, global environmental

policy, and climate change.

Prof. Heila Lotz-Sisitka holds a Tier

1 South African National Research

Foundation Chair in global change

and social learning systems, and is

a distinguished research professor

in education at Rhodes University,

South Africa.

Prof. Mirian Vilela is the executive

director of the Earth Charter

International Secretariat and the

Center for Education for Sustainable

Development at UPEACE.

die

gdi.de

earthcharter.org

Jürgen Olczyk

ru.ac.za

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Prof. em. Tan Sri Dato Dzulkifli

Abdul Razak is an educationist and

scientist, as well as chairman of the

board of directors of Universiti Sains

Islam, Malaysia, and rector of the In-

ternational Islamic University,

Malaysia.

Prof. em. Helga Kromp-Kolb is the

head of the Institute of Meteorology

and the Center for Global Change

and Sustainability at the University

of Natural Resources and Life

Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), where she

has also been a full professor since

1995.

Prof. (HSG) Dr. Sascha Spoun is

president of Leuphana University,

Lüneburg, and a visiting professor

for university management at the

University of St. Gallen.

Prof. Dr. Thomas Potthast is

professor of the ethics, theory, and

history of the biosciences and a

spokesman for the International

Center for Ethics in the Sciences

and Humanities at Eberhad Karls

University, Tübingen.

Kerstin

Sauer

Mitja Kobal/Greenpeace

iium.edu.my

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

“As an inter-faculty body, it (ISDL) strives to evolve into a

national, as well as an international, platform that

enables evidence-generating research and supports the

evidence-based application of findings in close

collaboration with partners from the Global South.”

Barth, Lang, Michelsen

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

ISDL members

Board o

irector

Daniel Lang

Daniel is a professor of transdisciplinary sustainability research at

Leuphana University in Lüneburg, Germany. In his research, he fo-

cuses on cooperation and mutual learning processes among differ-

ent scientific disciplines, as well as science and society, with the

aim to develop robust solution options for the urgent sustainability

problems of the 21

century.

Matthias Barth

Matthias is a professor of education for sustainable development

at Leuphana University in Lüneburg, Germany. His passion is for

research and teaching for sustainability, with an emphasis on com-

petence development, innovative learning settings, and curriculum

change.

Gerd Michelsen

Gerd is a professor for sustainability research and sustainability

science at Leuphana University, Lüneburg. He holds the UNESCO

Chair of Higher Education for Sustainable Development and his re-

search is driven by the question of how educational institutions can

face sustainability.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Staf

Deepika Joon

Deepika is a research associ-

ate at ISDL. She works on the

evaluation for SDGs as well

as its embedding in the de-

velopment of ESD projects

and investigates the emer-

gence of transformative

learning in youth leadership

interventions.

Lina Bürgener

Lina is a research associate

at ISDL. Her research focuses

on the development of sus-

tainability related competen-

cies and the development,

evaluation and implementa-

tion of innovative and sup-

porting learning settings.

David Lam

David is the scientific director

of the project tdAcademy. His

research focuses on impact

amplification of sustainability

initiatives in transformative

transdisciplinary research

and the role of indigenous

and local knowledge in

change processes.

Maria Freund

Maria is a research associate

at the project tdAcademy. In

her research she focuses on

contextual dependencies in

transdisciplinary research.

Kira Cieslewicz

Kira coordinates the work-

shop series Sustainability &

Digitization. She works at the

interface of organizational

and content-related issues

and facilitates the exchange

between selected experts in

the fields of digitalization and

sustainability.

Nurasih

Shamadiyah

Nurasih is a research fellow

at ISDL. Her main research in-

terests are on sustainability

of the food security program

and community participation.

Ev Kirst

Ev is a research associate at

the project HochN. In her re-

search she focuses on sus-

tainability-oriented develop-

ment in institutions as well as

on urban and rural sustaina-

bility transitions.

Thilo Schroth

Thilo is a research associate

of the project HochN. He is

working on longitudinal re-

search approaches for the

study of transformational re-

search and experimentation.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Affiliate

cholar

Lydia Kater-

Wettstädt

Lydia is administrative pro-

fessor for trans- and intercul-

tural learning and basic and

social science studies at

Leuphana University Lüne-

burg. Her research focuses

on education for sustainable

development and global

learning, pedagogic theory,

didactics, and teaching

methods.

Torben Schmidt

Torben is professor for teach-

ing English as a foreign lan-

guage at Leuphana University

Lüneburg. His research inter-

ests focus on project-based

learning, task-based lan-

guage learning, foreign lan-

guage learning with digital

media, and content and lan-

guage integrated learning.

Henrik von

Wehrden

Henrik is professor for quan-

titative methods and sustain-

ability science at Leuphana

University Lüneburg. He is

dean of the Faculty of Sus-

tainability and his research

spans across many spatial

scales and groups of organ-

isms, as well as explores the

normative dimensions of

methodological research.

Annika Weiser

Annika is a postdoctoral re-

searcher at Leuphana Col-

lege at Leuphana University

Lüneburg. She coordinates

the "Sustainability & Respon-

sibility" module and explores

the potentials of this interdis-

ciplinary study entry phase.

Her main research interests

evolve around learning at the

science-society interface.

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

“It is our intention to establish the ISDL as a facilitator

of mutual learning processes across boundaries and

as a substantial contributor to a safe and just future.”

ISDL, Declaration of Inception

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning

Imprint

Institute for Sustainable Development and Learning - ISDL

Leuphana University Lüneburg

Universitätsallee 1 / main building

21335 Lüneburg, Germany

E-Mail: isdl@leuphana.de

EDITORIAL OFFICE

Lina Bürgener, Carolin Ellerkamp

dieUmweltDruckerei GmbH

Hannover, Germany

This copyright notice applies to all photography and pictures in this brochure if not stated otherwise.

Photographs on the following pages were taken by Jannis Muser:

Front cover/inside, pp.6, 8, 21, 24, 31, 34, 38, 42, back cover/inside

climate neutrally printed on 100% recycled paper