30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Towards a Worldview Considerate Climate Change Education: Educators' Perceptions
Essi Aarnio-Linnanvuori1, Rosamund Portus2, Kathy Reilly3, Inkeri Rissanen1, Sabrina Sposito4
1Tampere University; 2University of the West of England Bristol; 3University of Galway; 4University of Genoa
Presenting Author: Aarnio-Linnanvuori, Essi
The challenge of tackling climate change calls for transformative educational approaches which prepare young people to navigate ongoing and future crises, loading heavy expectations on the shoulders of education (Reid 2019). Climate change education (CCE) refers to such teaching and learning that is connected to climate change. Yet, CCE is more than just learning about the content and facts of climate change: it is interdisciplinary, holistic, and aims to support transformation, active citizenship, and hope (Cantell et al. 2019; Kagawa & Selby 2010). Its learning process is flexible and social (Stevenson, Nicholls & Whitehouse 2017). It is not separate from other environment or sustainability related “educations” but can rather be described as environmental education or education for sustainable development that is executed through the lens of climate change.
For an educator, climate change is a complex topic to teach. Not only does it demand a lot from the teacher regarding mastery of subject matter, but it may also be an emotionally challenging topic and requires successful communication between teachers and learners. According to previous research, didactic approaches to CCE have been inefficient in affecting students’ attitudes and behaviour (Rousell & Cutter-MacKenzie-Knowles 2020). Recognising this, researchers call for participatory, interdisciplinary, creative, and affect-driven approaches to CCE, and awareness of values, worldview, and identity formation. In practice, however, teachers tend to concentrate on teaching natural scientific information about climate issues instead of embracing this kind of holistic approach (Monroe et al. 2019). A teacher may consider that having an emphasis on values and worldviews in education is difficult to implement or even to be unethical indoctrination (Aarnio-Linnanvuori 2018). European schools tend to uphold liberal educational values such as critical thinking and respect of diversity, and therefore strive for neutrality in many moral issues (van der Kooij et al. 2015). In both CCE and worldview education literature this aim has been challenged: neutral ground in worldview and moral discussions does not exist, and the seriousness of the ecological crisis requires deconstructing unsustainable cultural beliefs and developing worldviews that rely on empathy towards the more-than-human nature (Zilliacus & Wolff 2021; Värri 2019; Rissanen & Poulter, forthcoming). This should be executed in an educational environment that grows more diverse what comes to cultural, religious, and other worldview backgrounds of learners.
How, then, can climate change education be developed to a more worldview considerate direction? In this presentation, we present perceptions of 19 secondary school teachers and 17 nonformal educators from four European countries (Finland, Ireland, Italy, and UK). The study is part of European Consortium CCC-CATAPULT (Challenging the Climate Crisis: Children’s Agency to Tackle Policy Underpinned by Learning for Transformation). The purpose of the study is to find out, to what extend do supporters of climate learning consider worldview formation to be a central aim in their work. How do they advance it? What are the challenges of climate change education that the interviewees recognize?
Based on a content analysis of qualitative interviews, we argue that teachers and nonformal educators need tools and support to embrace a worldview considerate approach to climate change education. Some of our interviewees had been able to develop educational methods to help young people to reflect their beliefs and attitudes concerning climate change, but others felt that they were struggling. Based on our data, we also suggest ideas of how to develop climate change education towards a worldview considerate direction.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis is a qualitative study with a phenomenological approach. The aim of this study is to understand formal and nonformal educators’ perceptions to the nexus of worldview education and climate change education. The dataset of this study consists of semi-structured interviews collected during spring and autumn 2022 in four European cities or city regions: Bristol (United Kingdom), Galway (Ireland), Genoa (Italy), and Tampere (Finland), as a part of the European Consortium CCC-CATAPULT (Challenging the Climate Crisis: Children’s Agency to Tackle Policy Underpinned by Learning for Transformation). In each location, a minimum of four teachers in formal education and four educators in nonformal organizations were interviewed.
The interviewees were selected based on mutual criteria: Each location invited a minimum of four supporters of learning from within formal educational settings (e.g., four teachers representing different disciplines/subject areas). In addition, all locations invited a minimum of four supporters of learning/worldview formation from non-formal educational settings or non-educational settings (e.g., youth workers, representatives of local NGO’s, religious/worldview leaders). Two sets of questions were prepared: on for teachers and one for non-formal supporters of learning. Main themes asked related to experiences of teaching climate education (teacher track) or engaging young people with climate issues (alternative track), role of education in tackling climate change (both tracks), interviewees personal knowledge about climate change and confidence related to the content (both tracks), and youth climate attitudes and emotions (both tracks). Interviews were carried out either face-to-face or online, depending of COVID-19-situation in the location and what suited best for the interviewees. All interviewers prepared for interviews with mutual guidelines and used the same structures of questions. Interviewees were interviewed in the language of their location: English, Finnish, or Italian. The interviewees were treated as experts of their own work and the interviewers aimed to create an air of mutual respect and equality in the situation.
Next, the interviews were transcribed, and the primary data was captured in mutual analysis sheets. Finnish and Italian interviews were not translated completely but Finnish and Italian speaking researchers conducting analysis have translated relevant quotes. A thematization and preliminary content analysis of the data has been conducted. A more profound and sophisticated analysis will be conducted during spring 2023.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAccording to the preliminary findings, interviewees from all four countries felt as though CCE was an essential area of learning for young people and that it should be incorporated into school curriculums. Yet, the educators interviewed felt as though the topic of climate change was either missing from official curriculums or that the issue was being taught in an inappropriate way. They highlighted, for example, the importance of allowing for dialogue between young people and adults, importance of incorporating CCE into all subjects and years of study, the value of using education to enable agency, and the need to promote hope rather than worsening eco-anxieties.
Interviewees believed that they had a central role in providing CCE, that this role involved teaching young people the critical skills and knowledge to succeed in life, that it involved providing young people with solutions, necessitated helping young people to tackle climate-anxiety, and included encouraging both young people and their colleagues to take action. However, many struggled with the political and value-ladenness of climate discussions: Irish educators described having challenging encounters with students from farming backgrounds or who had been given misinformation by their parents, Finnish interviewees described the difficulty of addressing increasingly polarised classrooms, while UK educators spoke of their difficulties in discussing political issues with students due to the sensitivity of the topic and their government’s directives. A difference appeared in the Italian responses, where it was mainly the other supporters of learning who report having experienced situations where certain climate change and climate policy issues were divisive among young people. Interviewees explained that they had received either no training on the topic, or that their limited training was insufficient. Therefore, many interviewees felt neither confident nor equipped to teach this topic.
ReferencesAarnio-Linnanvuori, Essi. 2018. Ympäristö ylittää oppiainerajat: Arvolatautuneisuus ja monialaisuus koulun ympäristöopetuksen haasteina. [Environment crosses subject borders – Value-ladenness and interdisciplinarity as challenges for environmental education at school]. Doctoral dissertation. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
Cantell, Hannele, Tolppanen, Sakari, Aarnio-Linnanvuori, Essi & Lehtonen, Anna. 2019. Bicycle model on climate change education: presenting and evaluating a model. Environmental Education Research 25:5, 717-731. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2019.1570487.
Kagawa, Fumiyo & Selby, David. 2010. Climate change education: a critical agenda for interesting times. In Kagawa, Fumiyo & Selby, David (eds.), Education and climate change: living and learning in interesting times, 241–243. London: Routledge.
Monroe, Martha C., Plate, Richard R., Oxarart, Annie, Bowers, Alison, and Chaves, Willandia A. 2019. Identifying effective climate change education strategies: a systematic review of the research. Environmental Education Research 25:6, 791-812. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1360842
Reid, Alan. 2019. Climate change education and research: possibilities and potentials versus problems and perils? Environmental Education Research, 25:6, 767-790. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2019.1664075
Rissanen, I. and Poulter, S. (forthcoming). Religions and Worldviews as “the problem” in Finnish schools, in M. Thrupp, P. Seppänen, J. Kauko & S. Kosunen (eds.), Finland’s Famous Education System - Unvarnished insights into Finnish schooling. Springer
Rousell, David & Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, Amy. 2020. A systematic review of climate change education: giving children and young people a ‘voice’ and a ‘hand’ in redressing climate change, Children's Geographies, 18:2, 191-208, DOI: 10.1080/14733285.2019.1614532.
Stevenson, Robert B., Nicholls, Jennifer & Whitehouse, Hilary. 2017. What Is Climate Change Education? Curriculum Perspectives 37, 67-71. DOI 10.1007/s41297-017-0015-9.
van der Kooij, J.C., de Ruyter, D.J. and Miedema, S. (2015) Can we teach morality without influencing the worldview of students? Journal of Religious Education 63: 79–93.
Värri, V-M. (2018) Kasvatus ekokriisin aikakaudella. [Education at a time of eco-crisis] Tampere: vastapaino.
Zilliacus, H., and Wolff, L. (2021). Climate change and worldview transformation in Finnish education policy, in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press.
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Climate Change and Education in Shades of Blue: Between Darkness and Light with Agential Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology
Annelie Ott
Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway
Presenting Author: Ott, Annelie
Education is considered key in not only creating more sustainable communities (UN, 2015) but also in tackling climate change (UNESCO, 2010, 2020) through adaptation, mitigation (Anderson, 2012; Kagawa & Selby, 2012), and radical socio-economic change (e.g., Jickling, 2013; Selby & Kagawa, 2013, 2018; Tannock, 2021). In this paper, I discuss whether education is up to this task and the ways in which it can respond to climate change and other massive sustainability crises.
Addressing education as a response to climate change is interesting as theoretical developments, and especially the advent of new materialism challenge enlightenment thought that dominates much of Western education (Ricken & Masschelein, 2010). New materialist approaches emphasize the enmeshment of the human with the more-than-human. They highlight realism, embodiment, affectivity, relationality, non-anthropocentrism, and an ethics of solidarity and care.
Here, I draw on two approaches associated with new materialism: agential realism and object-oriented ontology. Despite their theoretical pitfalls, these two approaches offer two fruitful dimensions that can be used to think education with, especially in times of crisis: the agentic character of matter and humans’ limited accessibility to the world. These perspectives problematize ideas of knowing agents and skillful, deliberate actions; in doing so, they question the accounts of pro-environmental engagement that are commonly thought of along the lines of knowledge, hope, and action.
I will present two arguments. First, agential realism and object-oriented ontology challenge the basic premises on which much of modern educational thinking rests. They open a rift between educational ambitions and the premises education rests on—between what we want education to do and what education can achieve—thereby shaking education’s obsession with light and, eventually, the idea of educating for a specific purpose, especially that of sustainability. The alternative these two theories offer, I suggest, is a Bildung-perspective: being and becoming human in a world rife with struggle and contingency.
The second argument concerns the role of care and solidarity. Framing climate change through the lenses of agential realism and object-oriented ontology, I will highlight, especially evoke dystopian images—and the need for education to deal with grief and changing lifeworlds. A crucial task for education, then, in times of crisis, is to foster an ethics of care and solidarity. Such a focus, however, has been criticized as being merely therapeutic, one that overlooks the structural challenges that produce distress (Amsler, 2011). My take here is different. As I will discuss in more detail, solidarity and care align with Kropotkin’s (1902) concept of ‘mutual aid’. In the face of hostile conditions, they can, as part of education, work as a means of entering into new relations and can develop into ontological and political forces.
To frame this discussion, I develop the metaphor of ‘shades of blue’ for education in times of crisis. This metaphor is inspired by and advances Levitas’ (2007, 2013) work, which acknowledges the strong association of utopia with blue. Blue is perceived as an existential color and can be further related to dystopian images, to issues of power and force, and to solidarity and care. Framing education within ‘shades of blue’ offers an alternative to the predominant conception of education as the light that illuminates the dark—an idea that builds on the modern ideals of insight, growth, and progression (Stock, 2021).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedAgential realism and object-oriented ontology are theories that are suitable for little rational, little predictable, and only slightly conceivable worlds. Hence, these theories may be useful in times of crisis and upheaval, times when structures and regularities dissolve and the world undergoes profound changes (see also Cockburn, 2016; Peim & Stock, 2022).
Karen Barad’s (2007) agential realism builds on insights from quantum physics and assumes that they are relevant beyond the microscopic level. Supported by post-structural, feminist, and post-Marxist perspectives, Barad presents a range of epistemological, ontological, and ethical claims. Object-oriented ontology, with Graham Harman and Timothy Morton as two of its main representatives, seeks inspiration from continental philosophy and is grounded in Kant’s notion of the thing-in-itself—the idea that objects can only perceive the surface aspects of other objects, while the real objects remain ultimately hidden and withdraw. In contrast to much of new materialist theory, object-oriented ontology is more inclined to form, emphasizing stability over process, autonomy over relationality, and essence over fluidity. It is thus more correctly understood as a form of immaterialism (Harman, 2016). Still, there is a tendency to treat it along the same line as new materialist approaches (see e.g., Boysen, 2018; Gamble et al., 2019).
Despite fundamental ontological and epistemological differences, agential realism and object-oriented ontology also share commonalities. Crucially, they offer an alternative take on what has been addressed as the knowledge–action gap: the debate on existing knowledge and its ability to trigger respective pro-environmental action and behavior (e.g., Courtenay-Hall & Rogers, 2002; Jurek et al., 2022; Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). They both defy the rational premises underlying the gap—that of skillful navigation based on sufficiently functional knowledge: agential realism because of the agentic capacity of matter; object-oriented ontology because it regards access to reality as confined and possible only indirectly. The position they offer is situated between enlightened images and total ignorance—a ‘twilight zone,’ as dark pedagogy puts it; a zone that is ‘dunkel’ or dark (Lysgaard & Bengtsson, 2020; Lysgaard et al., 2019).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsWhat agential realism and object-oriented ontology highlight is not quite a pathway to sustainability or brighter futures. Rather, they challenge the modern paradigm inherent in the concept of sustainability—overall optimistic and exclusive ideas of human agency, governance, and progress—and related educational agendas. They encourage a rethinking of education, especially in times of crisis.
Accordingly, what is commonly referred to as climate change education cannot be a mere add-on to existing educational accounts but demands a reexamination of them, including their underlying arguments. The argument raises an awareness of taken-for-granted perspectives in the field, such as the overall optimistic expectations of education, its potential in dealing with climate change, and the predominant focus on hope. One alternative offered in the argument is a Bildung approach grounded in solidarity and care. With solidarity and care, the focus is redirected from promises of a better future and having faith in human agency to coping with present issues through means that resemble desired ends and that pave the way to a different—and possibly more just, yet unknown—future.
The argument sustains a concern for ethical, ontological, and epistemological matters in environmental and sustainability education. It highlights that sustainability issues cannot be reduced to matters of capitalism and neo-liberalism (Morton, 2018; Stables, 2020)—not least because these concepts themselves rest on a modern worldview. Looking for new ways of living together in a changing world and educating for it, thus, needs to involve exploring new (and old) ways of understanding human being and how such understandings affect societal and educational approaches.
ReferencesAmsler, S. S. (2011). From ‘therapeutic’ to political education: the centrality of affective sensibility in critical pedagogy. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2011.536512
Anderson, A. (2012). Climate Change Education for Mitigation and Adaptation. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(2), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408212475199
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway. Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press.
Boysen, B. (2018). The embarrassment of being human. Orbis Litterarum, 73(3), 225-242. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/oli.12174
Cockburn, L. M. (2016). Accepting Uncertainty: The Role of Nonhuman Agency in Shaping Responses to Climate Change. In L. Heininen & H. Nicol (Eds.), Climate Change and Human Security - From a Northern Point of View (pp. 39-50). Centre on Foreign Policy and Federalism.
Courtenay-Hall, P., & Rogers, L. (2002). Gaps in Mind: Problems in environmental knowledge-behaviour modelling research. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 283-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145438
Harman, G. (2016). Immaterialism: Objects and Social Theory. Polity Press.
Jickling, B. (2013). Normalizing catastrophe: an educational response. Environmental Education Research, 19(2), 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.721114
Kagawa, F., & Selby, D. (2012). Ready for the Storm: Education for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(2), 207-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408212475200
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Kropotkin, P. (1902). Mutual Aid. A Factor in Evolution. McClure, Philips & Company.
Levitas, R. (2013). Utopia as Method. The Imaginary Reconstitution of Society. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137314253
Lysgaard, J. A., Bengtsson, S., & Hauberg-Lund Laugesen, M. (2019). Dark Pedagogy. Education, Horror and the Anthropocene. Palgrave Pivot.
Morton, T. (2018). Dark Ecology. Columbia University Press.
Peim, N., & Stock, N. (2022). Education after the end of the world. How can education be viewed as a hyperobject? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 54(3), 251-262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2021.1882999
Selby, D., & Kagawa, F. (2013). Unleashing Blessed Unrest As the Heating Happens. 2013, 3-15.
Selby, D., & Kagawa, F. (2018). Teetering on the Brink:Subversive and Restorative Learning in Times of Climate Turmoil and Disaster. Journal of Transformative Education, 16(4), 302-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344618782441
Stock, N. (2021). Darkness and light. The archetypal metaphor for education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(2), 151-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1750363
UNESCO. (2010). Climate Change Education for Sustainable Development: the UNESCO Climate Change Initiative. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000190101
UNESCO. (2020). Education for Sustainable Development: A Roadmap. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802
30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)
Paper
Climate becomings through XR and Nordic Rebellion
Helen Hasslöf
Malmö university, Faculty of education a, Sweden
Presenting Author: Hasslöf, Helen
Many strategies for scientific communication (in both policy and education) still focus on mainly conveying facts more clearly. This despite the research on scientific education and communication that over the past 20 years clearly shows how this type of communication is limited in order to bring about real change and commitment (Fedele et al, 2019; Håkansson et al. 2020). In relation to climate change which often is grounded within science education, this becomes problematic. Hence, since the fact-based science education brings its entangled objective, positivistic approach of understanding the world, (i.e., the subject/object, nature/culture divide, Latour 2014; 2018), this may risk the students to identify themselves as more or less passive observers and not part of the climate processes (Verlie, 2019). As well there still is the shadow of “the Truth”, revealing itself through the scientific knowledge, even in relation to complex issues as climate change.
Creating knowledge about the climate crises involves more than education of natural and social sciences. This means being attentive to the ways in which our knowledge and the material dimensions of the world around us, the social orders we live by, and the normative values we share are all intertwined (Barad, 2007; Haraway 2017). This study rests on the assumption that the different ways we live and act, also relates to what we know and how we experience the world around us. “Knowing is a matter of intra-acting” as Barad puts it (2017, p. 149).
This study deals with the phenomena of climate change as discursive practices entangled with social, ethical and material intra-actions, as relations that have a performative nature and real effects (Verlie, 2019). In this study time is of specific interest, revealing entanglements of socio-material intra-actions as different climate change becomings of response-ability.
Since 2018 new social movements of activists addressing the climate and ecological crises has rapidly grown. Extinction rebellion (XR) is an example of a grass root movement engaged in the climate and ecological crises and societal transformation, with a tremendous growth of international active members and a growing attention in media within a short time. Hence an interesting entrance of this study, is to explore intra-actions of climate change becomings in their actions. This is particularly interesting to investigate during a period when scientific facts about climate change and different requirements for environmental considerations are being questioned.
To explore how climate change may be (re)configured trough intra-actions, I started this relational exploration in the summer of 2021, when Extinction Rebellion (XR) rang the bell for a Nordic Rebellion. A call that echoed on social media to address the Nordic countries to uprise for a mass action of civil disobedience. Carbon as an economic oil resource and a threat to life were in the centre of these actions. The initiative called upon devoted and new rebels to make a difference in Oslo, in the arising time-window of opportunity, pending the nearby Norwegian parliamentary elections in September 2021.
To experience and take part of performed entangled assemblages, I placed myself in the middle of some of these performing actions. The central question guiding this study: How may phenomena of climate change becomings be experienced as meaning that matters during (intra-)actions of Extinction Rebellions actions?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWith inspiration of the theoretical frameworks of Barad (2007) and Haraway (2017) I acknowledged phenomena of climate change as entangled ongoing time-space intra-actions within Extinction rebellion’s climate actions. In this study time is of specific interest. Time is an important part of the apparatuses in the socio-material intra-actions, showing different climate change becomings and its entangled response-ability of human action.
Since intra-acting means that a phenomenon is continuously in the making, it is not possible to come up with a definite form of the phenomenon (Wagensveld & Jolink, 2018). Barad (2007) states that “Spacetimemattering” is a dynamic ongoing reconfiguration of a field of relationalities among “moments,” “places”, and “things” (in their inseparability), where scale is iteratively (re)made in intra-actions (p111).
These material discursive apparatuses hence depend on how material processes in the atmosphere are affecting the temperature on earth as well as the social constructs of human’s meaning-making. This is resulting in different becomings of climate change with time as a central actor of how these assemblages makes meaning.
Some concepts of interest for this study:
“Diffraction, Barad (2007) suggests, is about the “entangled nature of differences” in the social world and how socio-material processes “intra-act” from moment to moment. Studies of such diffractions “highlight, exhibit, and make evident the entangled structure of the changing and contingent ontology of the world.
In a diffractive analysis it is the relational result that are of interest. Accordingly, this involves looking for contrasts and connections, and is not about representation or classification. Barad (2007) points out that, close attention is paid to detail in a diffractive analysis, to the intra-actions and to the possibilities for new ideas to evolve.
The empirical material consists of ethnographic data collected from actions of XR, mainly in connection to the mass action of the Nordic rebellion week in Oslo in august 2021 (interviews, observations, rhetoric texts, social media and fieldnotes).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe initial findings discuss how “time” intra-act in assemblages of different meaning. Time becomes a relational actor of different meaning of the urgency or emergency of climate change due to temporalities of time, e.g.: Carbon budget temporality, Generation gap, Eco-modernization, Desynchronized temporalities of ecology and market economy, Slow democracy and fast decisions. These are some examples of emerging temporalities showing different meaning in relation to climate crises and relations of truth, trust and response-ability.
How we allow ourselves to see the world in new ways can be crucial in creating opportunities to address the challenges posed by climate change. Attention of how we understand the world, may create attention of values, inspiration, and visions to create new stories for the future.
Hence, in the actions where Extinction rebellion encounters the world, time-space-mattering within the phenomenon of climate change reveal realities of matter related to temporalities. These temporalities marked by the difference of urgency and responsibility are existing as parallel ontologies. These realities of truth and trust carry experiences of empowerment for actions, sadness, fear and shame, frustration, and requirements of system change, as well as some of convictions of possibilities for innovation and growth.
ReferencesBarad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entan-glement of Matter and Meaning, Durham: Duke University Press.
Fedele, G., Donatti, C.I., Harvey, C.A., Hannah, L., & Hole, D.G. (2019) Transformative adaptation to climate change for sustainable social-ecological systems. Environmental Science and Policy, 101, 116-125.
Haraway, D. (2017). Staying with the trouble. Making Kin with the Chthulucene London: Duke University Press.
Håkansson, M., Kronlid, D.O., & Östman, L. (2019). Searching for the political dimension in education for sustainable development: socially critical, social learning and radical democratic approaches. Environmental Education Research, 25(1), 6–32
Latour, B (2014). Agency at the time of the Anthropocene. New Literary History, 45(1):1–18.
Latour, B (2018). Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime. Polity Press
Verlie, B. (2019) Bearing worlds:learning to live-with climate change. Environmental Education Research, 25:5, 751-766
Wagensveld, K., & Jolnik, J. (2018) Performative research: A Baradian framework. MAB 92(1)2, 27-35.
|
