As multiple global sustainability crises are getting more severe and existential, a better understanding of how people undergo deep personal transformations related to sustainability is needed. In the educational debate on sustainability learning, transformative learning theories are widely used. To analyze specific phases of transformative learning, we derived five meta-phases from the literature (novel experience, reflection, social exchange, shift of action, shift of meaning). Although human emotions often arise during the confrontation with sustainability issues and are central to moral action, no substantial, theorized understanding of the role of emotions within sustainability-related transformative learning exists to date. We conducted a systematic review (following the PRISMA guidelines) and screened 355 publications to close this research gap. After applying the exclusion criteria, the in-depth analysis of 20 studies showed that sound theoretical references to theories of emotion and transformative learning are rare. The review shows clearly that diverse emotions permeate sustainability-related transformative learning processes. Among these are both negative emotions to novel learning experiences concerning sustainability (e.g., sadness, shame, disgust, guilt) as well as positive emotions in the context of social exchange (e.g., awe, gratitude, fun) and associated with newly formed actions (e.g., fulfillment, pride). Accordingly, to enable emotionally positive learning experiences, relationship and action orientation are particularly important within sustainability learning. The analyzed studies call for an educational practice where emotions can be experienced, expressed, and understood in a safe atmosphere. Future research in this area should use more stable theoretical foundations for emotions and transformative learning theory and apply methods that can capture deeper levels of subjective experience.

Transformative learning has become one of the most prominent learning theory in regard to sustainable development. It holds enormous potential for explaining and accompanying learning processes related to processes of transformation for sustainability, especially due to its emphasis on changing meaning perspectives in discussions with others in spaces free of coercion. In addition, it inspires learners and educators to pay particular attention to emotional challenges when they engage in critical thinking. This theoretical paper explores the potential of transformative learning theory by examining informal learning environments where people do not explicitly intend to learn but learning happens en passant or incidentally. It shows the ability of transformative learning theory to explain what can happen on the level of individual learning, organizational learning, learning in multi-professional networks, and learning in transdisciplinary or transformative research cooperation processes. Based on this analysis, recommendations can be derived to stimulate, enable, and accompany transformative learning processes for sustainability.

Education is viewed as a critical keystone in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Specifically, Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is meant to enable everyone to contribute to sustainable development (SDG 4.7). This target is monitored using the global indicator 4.7.1 – mainstreaming of ESD in policies, curricula, training of educators and student assessment. Here, we offer a conceptual and methodological framework for assessments of SDG 4.7.1 (input‐level) that addresses both quality and depth of implementation and speed of change. The approach combines document analysis with external expert evaluation and is applied to 10‐year data (>11,000 documents) from all formal areas of education in Germany (early childhood education, school education, vocational education and training, higher education). Currently, ESD is mostly implemented in Germany as an “add‐on” to the educational system, with all sub‐indicators ranging from “isolated mentioning” of ESD and related concepts to “partial integration”. Across most areas of education, the sub‐indicator training of educators was evaluated as most deficient. With regard to the speed of change, it was found that the implementation of ESD is dynamic, with all sub‐indicators having been evaluated as increasing. The proposed framework can increase the validity, reliability, and comparability of both country reporting and scientific assessments of SDG 4.7.1. We argue for independent and integrative monitoring across input, process, output and outcome to complement self‐reporting and to support evidence‐informed policymaking on sustainability in education.

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) contributes to a holistic transformation of education systems, fostering deeply rooted learning processes required to co-create a sustainable future for all. The independent project National Monitoring on ESD in Germany traces the status and progress of formal ESD implementation via repeated large-scale indicator-based document analysis. Including over 4500 documents from early childhood education, school education, higher education, and vocational education and training, this study shows that the process of ESD implementation gained momentum over the period of the Global Action Programme (2015–2019). At the same time, large discrepancies remain between the areas of education, different types of documents, federal states, and with regard to the depth and quality of the contextualization of ESD and related concepts. While considerable developments are identifiable within all four formal areas of education, strong additional efforts are required for a comprehensive structural implementation of ESD in Germany. Although the results of the study focus on the status and progress of ESD within the German education system, the methodological framework may also serve as groundwork for other independent, comprehensive, and supportive monitoring programs.

The multiple crises of unsustainability are provoking increasing stress and unpleasant emotions among students. If higher education is to fulfill its mission to support transformation processes toward sustainable development, it must adapt its pedagogical approaches to help students deepen their critical thinking and empower them to engage in these transformation processes. For this reason, emotions – which can also prevent critical thinking – should be carefully addressed within transformative learning journeys. However, these journeys are themselves challenging for learners and educators. They push them to abandon stable meaning perspectives, causing feelings of incoherence and tension. Learners need safe enough spaces to navigate these situations of uncertainty. The central questions of this manuscript are: What is meant by safe enough spaces? How can learners, educators, and higher education institutions create and hold such spaces? These questions are explored on three different levels: (1) the intrapersonal level, (2) the interpersonal level, and (3) the organizational and systemic level of discourses in higher education. For the intrapersonal level, perspectives inspired by neurobiology are used to discuss reaction patterns of our autonomous nervous system and present insights into stress development. Learners should feel bodily safe when engaging in transformative learning processes. This is supported by balancing the challenges learners face with the resources they have. For the interpersonal level, the manuscript argues that focusing solely on rational discourse is insufficient to support safe enough spaces for transformative learning. We call for a culture of edifying conversations supported by respectful relationships among learners, as they are more adequate for regaining self-direction. For the organizational and intertwined systemic level, the ambition is followed to make higher education institutions offer learning environments that feel safe enough for all involved. However, as these institutions are strongly influenced by dynamics of economization and competition, they do not necessarily empower learners to challenge and disrupt unsustainable and neoliberal discourses. The manuscript explores how learners and educators can cultivate engaged critique by acknowledging their own embeddedness in neoliberal dynamics and opening up so-called transformative spaces for institutional change. Finally, recommendations for educational practices in higher education for sustainable development are offered.

In Germany, the implementation of the UNESCO Global Action Programme (GAP) on Education for sustainable development (ESD) 2015–2019 aims to implement ESD more profoundly within the structures of Germany’s educational system. In this context, a national monitoring has been set up in order to analyze the extent and quality of ESD implementation in all educational areas. The paper contains the results of an indicator-based desk research comprising a content analysis of key documents in three areas of education: early childhood education, school education and higher education over a period of 5 years (2011–2016). Overall, the main results indicate that, at the level of key documents, the goal of a broad implementation of ESD is not yet achieved, while there are considerable differences among the federal states. ESD and related concepts can be found more frequently particularly in documents that are more recent. At the same time, ESD is increasingly predominating other educational concepts such as environmental education. The results are one component of a comprehensive monitoring process of ESD-implementation on the level of documents and offer important insights relevant for further (political) activities aiming at a mainstreaming of ESD.