Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 63, Issue 6, pp 811–828 | Cite as

Mapping a sustainable future: Community learning in dialogue at the science–society interface

  • Matthias Barth
  • Daniel J. Lang
  • Philip Luthardt
  • Ulli Vilsmaier
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

In 2015, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) announced that the Science Year 2015 would focus on the “City of the Future”. It called for innovative projects from cities and communities in Germany dedicated to exploring future options and scenarios for sustainable development. Among the successful respondents was the city of Lüneburg, located in the north of Germany, which was awarded funding to establish a community learning project to envision a sustainable future (“City of the Future Lüneburg 2030+”). What made Lüneburg’s approach unique was that the city itself initiated the project and invited a broad range of stakeholders to participate in a community learning process for sustainable development. The authors of this article use the project as a blueprint for sustainable city development. Presenting a reflexive case study, they report on the process and outcomes of the project and investigate community learning processes amongst different stakeholders as an opportunity for transformative social learning. They discuss outputs and outcomes (intended as well as unintended) in relation to the specific starting points of the project to provide a context-sensitive yet rich narrative of the case and to overcome typical criticisms of case studies in the field.

Keywords

Community learning Sustainable development Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Open learning environments Science-society interface Visioning 

Résumé

Imaginer un avenir pérenne : l’apprentissage communautaire concerté à l’interface entre science et société – Le ministère fédéral allemand de la formation et de la recherche annonçait en 2015 que l’Année de la science en cours serait dédiée à la « cité de demain » . Il appelait les villes et collectivités d’Allemagne à élaborer des projets innovants consacrés à l’étude d’options et de scénarios futurs servant le développement durable. Parmi les villes retenues figure Lunebourg située dans le nord du pays, qui a reçu un financement pour réaliser un projet d’apprentissage communautaire portant sur la vision d’un avenir pérenne (« Lunebourg Cité de demain 2030 +). La caractéristique originale dans la proposition de Lunebourg résidait dans le fait que la Ville a lancé le projet et invité une grande variété d’intervenants à participer à un mouvement d’apprentissage communautaire en vue du développement durable. Les auteurs de l’article utilisent ce projet comme modèle de développement urbain pérenne. À travers une étude de cas réflexive, ils en décrivent la démarche et les résultats, et explorent les processus d’apprentissage communautaire chez divers acteurs, qui conduisent à un apprentissage social transformateur. Ils analysent les réalisations et résultats (escomptés ou inattendus) par rapport aux conditions de départ spécifiques du projet, pour en fournir un récit à la fois contextuel et riche, et dépasser les critiques d’études de cas typiques dans ce domaine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2006). Promoting environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour through free-choice learning experiences: What is the state of the game? Environmental Education Research, 11(3), 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barth, M. (2015). Implementing sustainability in higher education: Learning in an age of transformation., Routledge studies in sustainable development series London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Barth, M., Adomßent, M., Fischer, D., Richter, S., & Rieckmann, M. (2014). Learning to change universities from within: A service-learning perspective on promoting sustainable consumption in higher education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62(1), 72–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barth, M., & Thomas, I. (2012). Synthesising case study research: Ready for the next step? Environmental Education Research, 18(6), 751–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barth, M., & Timm, J. (2011). Higher education for sustainable development: Students’ perspectives on an innovative approach to educational change. Journal of Social Science, 7(1), 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung; German Federal Ministry of Education and Research). (2015). “City of the Future” contest [webpage]. Retrieved 16 August 2017 from https://www.wettbewerb-zukunftsstadt.de/infos/english.html.
  7. Bodorkós, B., & Pataki, G. (2009). Linking academic and local knowledge: Community-based research and service learning for sustainable rural development in Hungary: The Roles of Academia in Regional Sustainability Initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(12), 1123–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, E. H. (2001). A structural analysis of the R. Kahane Code of Informality: Elements toward a theory of informal education. Sociological Inquiry, 71(3), 357–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Colardyn, D., & Bjornavold, J. (2004). Validation of formal, non-formal and informal learning: Policy and practices in EU member states. European Journal of Education, 39(1), 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corcoran, P. B., Walker, K. E., & Wals, A. E. J. (2004). Case studies, make-your-case studies, and case stories: A critique of case-study methodology in sustainability in higher education. Environmental Education Research, 10(1), 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dillon, J., & Reid, A. (2004). Issues in case-study methodology in investigating environmental and sustainability issues in higher education: Towards a problem-based approach? Environmental Education Research, 10(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eshach, H. (2006). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Falk, I., & Harrison, L. (1998). Community learning and social capital: “Just having a little chat”. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 50(4), 609–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Firth, R., & Smith, M. (2013). As the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development comes to an end: What has it achieved and what are the ways forward? Curriculum Journal, 24(2), 169–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fourie, M. (2003). Beyond the ivory tower: Service learning for sustainable community development. South African Journal of Higher Education, 17(1), 31–38.Google Scholar
  17. Gerber, B. L., Marek, E. A., & Cavallo, A. M. L. (2001). Development of an informal learning opportunities assay. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 569–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2006). Theoretical sampling. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Sociological methods (pp. 105–150). New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
  19. Gruszka, K., & Rammel, C. (2016). Science-society interfaces: Transforming universities. In W. Leal Filho & L. Brandli (Eds.), Engaging stakeholders in education for sustainable development at university level (pp. 177–190). World sustainability series. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Hopkinson, P., Hughes, P., & Layer, G. (2008). Sustainable graduates: Linking formal, informal and campus curricula to embed education for sustainable development in the student learning experience. Environmental Education Research, 14(4), 435–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jackson, T., & Michaelis, L. (2003). Policies for sustainable consumption: A report to the Sustainable Development Commission. London: Sustainable Development Commission.Google Scholar
  23. Kahane, R. (1997). The origins of postmodern youth: Informal youth movements in a comparative perspective. International studies on childhood and adolescence: Vol. 4. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  24. Kasl, E., Marsick, V. J., & Dechant, K. (1997). Teams as learners a research-based model of team learning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33(2), 227–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keen, M., Brown, V. A., & Dyball, R. (2005). Social learning: A new approach to environmental management. In M. Keen, V. A. Brown, & R. Dyball (Eds.), Social learning in environmental management. Building a sustainable future (pp. 3–21). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  26. Krohn, W. (2008). Learning from case studies. In G. Hirsch Hadorn, H. Hoffmann-Riem, S. Biber-Klemm, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, D. Joye, C. Pohl, U. Wiesmann, & E. Zemp (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 369–383). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krohn, W. (2010). Interdisciplinary cases and disciplinary knowledge. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 31–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kyburz-Graber, R. (2004). Does case-study methodology lack rigour? The need for quality criteria for sound case-study research, as illustrated by a recent case in secondary and higher education. Environmental Education Research, 10(1), 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kyburz-Graber, R. (2016). Case study research on higher education for sustainable development: Epistemological foundation and quality challenges. In M. Barth, G. Michelsen, M. Rieckmann, & I. Thomas (Eds.), Routledge handbook of higher education for sustainable development (pp. 126–141). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research/Qualitative Sozialforschung, 1(2), Article 20 [online]. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089/2385.
  32. Michelsen, G. (2013). Sustainable development as a challenge for undergraduate students: The module “Science bears responsibility” in the Leuphana Bachelor’s programme. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(4), 1505–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moore, A. L., & Brooks, R. (1996). Community learning organisations. In K. E. Watkins & V. J. Marsick (Eds.), In action: Creating the learning organization: Twenty-two case studies from the real world of training (pp. 199–207). Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.Google Scholar
  34. Noguchi, F., Guevara, J. R., & Yorozu, R. (2015). Communities in action: Lifelong learning for sustainable development. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.Google Scholar
  35. Parson, E. A., & Clark, W. C. (1995). Sustainable development as social learning: Theoretical perspectives and practical challenges for the design of a research program. In L. H. Gunderson, C. S. Holling, & S. S. Light (Eds.), Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions (pp. 428–460). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., Newig, J., Parrish, B., Prell, C., Raymond, C., & Stringer, L. C. (2010). What is social learning? Ecology and Society, 15(4), r1: Response to Pahl-Wostl. 2006. “The Importance of Social Learning in Restoring the Multifunctionality of Rivers and Floodplains.” Ecology and Society, 15(4), r1. Retrieved 28 August 2017 from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/resp1/.
  38. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461(7263), 472–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenberg Daneri, D., Trencher, G., & Petersen, J. (2015). Students as change agents in a town-wide sustainability transformation: The Oberlin Project at Oberlin College. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 16, 14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rowe, D., & Hiser, K. (2016). Higher education for sustainable development in the community and through partnerships. In M. Barth, G. Michelsen, M. Rieckmann, & I. Thomas (Eds.), Routledge handbook of higher education for sustainable development (pp. 315–330). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Seyfang, G., & Smith, A. (2007). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Environmental Politics, 16(4), 584–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Stoecker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. The Sociological Review, 39(1), 88–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Topolsky, J. (1997). On target, on task, on reflection: The culture of learning communities. In Plenary of the international conference community development society, Athens, GA, USA.Google Scholar
  45. UN (United Nations). (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. A/RES/70/1. New York: United Nations. Retrieved 12 October 2017 from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf.
  46. UN DESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs). (2012). Sustainable development in the 21st century (SD21): Review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio principles. New York: UN DESA, Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future.Google Scholar
  47. UN DESA. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals: 17 goals to transform our world. United Nations Sustainable development knowledge platform [online resource]. Retrieved 31 December 2015 from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/.
  48. UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization). (2014a). UNESCO-Roadmap zur Umsetzung des Weltaktionsprogramms “Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung” [German translation of UNESCO 2014a, listed above]. Bonn: Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission (DUK). Retrieved 28 August 2017 from http://www.bne-portal.de/sites/default/files/downloads/publikationen/DUK%20-%20Roadmap%20Weltaktionsprogramm%20BNE.pdf.
  49. UNESCO. (2014b). UNESCO Roadmap for implementing the global action programme on education for sustainable development. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 28 August 2017 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002305/230514e.pdf.
  50. Vilsmaier, U., & Lang, D. J. (2015). Making a difference by marking the difference: Constituting in-between spaces for sustainability learning. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 16, 51–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wals, A. E. J. (2012). Shaping the education of tomorrow: 2012 Report on the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  52. Yin, R. K. (1987). Case study research: Design and methods (6th printing, Vol. 5). Applied social research methods series. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (2nd ed., Vol. 34). Applied social research methods series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. and UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leuphana University of LüneburgLüneburgGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options