(Still in the introduction, Wals is summarising the chapters)
This is from his summary of chapter 3:
[social learning] ... is an essentially contestable concept that is claiming, normatively, to offer desirable directions for action, and at the same time demanding practical change. Therefore it must be elaborated in an action-oriented way, reflecting a contextual balance between what is deemed desirable and what may be made feasible.
I think it is important to recognise that social learning and particularly societal learning:
- is normative
- is action-oriented
This means that it involves change, and change always means winners and losers, however relative. And so social learning is always critical, whether or not the term is explicitly used. It also opens up questions of ethics and power. Yes the power is coming from below generally and is horizontal not vertical, but it is still power, and with power comes responsibility.
His summary of chapter 4 highlights some interesting relevant questions:
- If sustainable development is contestable, can and should learning lead to agreement?
- If learning for SD is to contribute to action for sustainable development, then how can the relationship between thinking and doing be conceived? and that is back to the last posts on action competence maybe..?
- If reflexivity is involded in action for SD, then learning must include fundamental values, worldviews and identity. How can that be achieved? i think this is refering to the critical and responsible point i was making above.