ESD, CRITIQUE, AND EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE Unveiling Epistemic Injustice in Education for Sustainable Development: A Critical Examination

Sammanfattning

Aim: Within the global arena where Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is implemented as a global policy, a dual dynamic of epistemic diversity and epistemic inequality coexists. In light of this complex reality, this study systematically delves into the theoretical critiques of ESD through an epistemic lens. It perceives criticism as akin to an epistemic power struggle, portraying critique not merely as dissent but as intricate performances unveiling the underlying epistemic tensions within the domain of ESD. Theory: The study is grounded in Miranda Fricker's seminal work on epistemic injustice, Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (2007). It is supplemented by subsequent developments of her work in general, and is particularly informed by the holistic framework in epistemic injustice developed by Cummings et al. (2023) which integrates epistemic (in)justice with the sustainable development discourse. Methodology: The study employs a systematic review methodology. Forty-three articles from the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC) database were analysed and inclusion criteria were established to enhance the relevance and quality of the included studies. PRISMA guidelines were followed to ensure a comprehensive and transparent approach incorporating adequate quality appraisal filters. Results: By interpreting criticisms as manifestations of varied epistemic positions, the study reveals the complex interplay of diverse epistemic positions within ESD highlighting the contentious nature of the discourse. It underscores epistemic tensions in ESD critique revealing heterogeneous ways in which epistemic injustices can arise, which encompass injustices stemming from individual, collective, structural, and systematic aspects. Thus, the study not only identifies areas of discontent in ESD, but also provides insights into realizing ESD's pluralistic aims and navigating the challenges of promoting epistemically inclusive practices. Ultimately, the study contributes to a nuanced understanding of ESD’s potential to engender and/ or perpetuate epistemic injustice and raises questions with regards to ESD’s capacity to foster successful knowledge co-production among disparate worldviews. Given that epistemic justice is a prerequisite for social justice, the study ultimately highlights the imperative to address both aspirations in tandem, particularly within the context of ESD.