This paper argues for a historical and socio‐cultural approach to participation as a key concept in a democratically oriented education for sustainable development (ESD). With three empirical examples from a non‐formal educational setting, it demonstrates that even though a relatively open framework is provided for genuine participation, certain themes and problems can be marginalised in the dominant discourse of sustainable development. Since the 1990s, this discourse has been characterised as ‘ecological modernisation’ in northern Europe. I show that there is a risk that, rather than enlightening sustainable development, participatory ESD will contribute to a self‐deceptive simulation. In order to go beyond this and contribute to the development of ESD, I argue by way of conclusion for a weighting of work with dilemmas, dissensus and deliberative communication.

Climate change education (CCE) is a new phenomenon which is gaining increasing significance in the work of international organizations and international non-governmental organizations. Based primarily on a cross-national desk study of national policy documents relevant to CCE in 17 countries, which was commissioned by UNESCO to gain a robust contextualized understanding of national CCE policies to inform UNESCO’s guidelines on CCE in the context of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), this article argues that CCE, since 2008, has become an issue for policy making in countries ranging from the least developed countries to emerging economies and developed countries. The article seeks to answer two questions. First, how does CCE relate to ESD? Second, what specific roles do national governmental institutions play in the governance of ESD and CCE? The overall trend identified by the cross-national analysis is convergence, rather than divergence, between CCE and ESD; ESD is seen either as an overarching label that encompasses CCE or as a separate effort yet interlinked with CCE. Another trend identified is that CCE, as well as ESD, is approached with ‘soft’ governance instruments such as consultations, networking structures and provision of guidance, rather than regulations. The article highlights the specific meta-governance role to be played by national governments, including ensuring norm supporting structures at the systemic level.

Van Poeck, K., J. Læssøe, and T. Block. 2017. An exploration of sustainability change agents as facilitators of nonformal learning: mapping a moving and intertwined landscape. Ecology and Society 22(2):33. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09308-220233

Alrøe, H. F., H. Moller, J. Læssøe, and E. Noe. 2016. Opportunities and challenges for multicriteria assessment of food system sustainability. Ecology and Society 21(1):38.http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-08394-210138