Across the Asia-Pacific, economic growth continues to be the yardstick of progress and development. Government officials and economists frequently point to a country’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product), the standard measure of the value added created through the production of goods and services in a country during a certain period, to signal its national progress. It is also inscribed in the Sustainable Development Goals, where education is often described as a vital driver of economic growth. 

However, amidst catastrophic climate change and a global economy that remains reliant on fossil fuels, post-growth researchers and social activists are calling on governments to reconsider whether GDP and unquestioned economic growth are useful tools for assessing social progress. Instead, they are challenging the necessity of limitless economic growth in improving people’s lives. 

“Growth simply means an increase in aggregate production, as measured in market prices,” Dr. Jason Hickel, a professor at the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, said in an interview with the Guardian. He explained that by this crude metric, one million USD worth of teargas is valued the same in the market as one million USD worth of healthcare or education spending. It is worth pointing out that the social value of the two goods is disparate, with healthcare and education spending arguably holding more potential to better people’s lives. What matters in social progress is not cumulative production but the provision of goods and services that will materially improve people’s lives and realize ecological goals, such as affordable housing, sustainable transportation, and universal healthcare. This approach is part of post-growth approaches such as Degrowth, a set of alternative economic policies focusing on a planned and democratic reduction in overall GDP in high-emitting industries and countries.

“Every time a politician says they want more economic growth, we need to ask: growth of what and for whose benefit?” Hickel added.

Shifting education’s purpose to support a global just transition

At the 4th Educators Stand for Climate Justice and Just Transition conference in Taipei, guest speaker Wai Ying, a researcher at the Taiwan Climate Action Network, posed a timely question to educators: Can education move beyond producing workers for the economy and become repurposed to support a global just transition?

Wai Ying said that education’s role in tackling climate change is usually tied to producing workers for the green economy. However, he questioned that education that only serves market demands cannot deliver genuine change. “A market-only lens reproduces the power structures that created climate injustice in the first place — just in greener packaging,” he said.

More importantly, a global just transition strategy must necessarily include education. Education workers must become active participants in these policy dialogues, according to a report on Just Transition and Care Work by UNRISD. Recognizing that education involves nurturing and that educational systems should teach people how to care for the planet, while also centering equality and fairness instead of unsustainable individualism, are key recommendations in the report. By teaching students to care for their environment beyond symbolic gestures, educators can help raise citizens who are oriented towards actions that drive systemic change. This is why the education sector and educators are critical dimensions of a global just transition strategy.

What can teachers do today?

Acknowledging that systemic change takes time, Wai Ying said that teachers can already do a few things inside and outside the classroom to support a global just transition. He pointed to a few examples, such as the Guandu Juniro High, Taipei’s first publicly owned solar-powered rooftop power plant, which is being run by the Homemakers Union Foundation. He added that at least 2% of the revenues from the power plant go to the school’s energy education, which is also funding teacher training, energy costs, assemblies, and even the student drama club. In the United Kingdom, the National Education Union has been actively supporting the climate justice movement by standing in solidarity with student climate strikers, campaigning for climate education in the curriculum, and training “green reps” across schools to make the connection between climate impacts and labor conditions. 

He added that there are three skills that educators have the potential to instil among students: systems-thinking such that students comprehend that climate change is connected to labor, gender, class and generation issues across local and global scales; democratic participation where students understand the importance of collective climate action and that they are empowered to negotiate, organize and decide beyond the classroom; and practicing hope by teaching students to understand that collective action is the answer to eco-anxiety.

Redefining education beyond green growth

Indeed, rethinking education’s purpose beyond the green economy pipeline will be crucial in achieving a global just transition. This calls for teaching climate change from a climate justice perspective by encouraging students to examine who bears the greatest risks and losses from climate impacts and who holds the power to avert the catastrophic consequences of fossil fuel dependence. More broadly, it involves transforming education to foster a societal shift in attitudes about the economy, where people understand that the economy should support the well-being of communities over corporate profits and must guarantee that no one is left behind by ensuring an ecologically viable future for everyone. 

To support EIAP unionists wishing to explore this topic, the E4SD program will be holding a webinar session on Degrowth as part of its Climate Justice series in the coming months. Please stay tuned for further announcements.