The UNESCO-GAP in Germany is a complex multi-stakeholder process led by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research with a differentiated structure including a national platform, 6 expert forums and different partner networks. The Office of the Scientific Advisor of the GAP has designed a comprehensive educational monitoring process, with the aim of analyzing the status quo of ESD in the different educational areas of the German educational system. The design of the monitoring process on the German national level was developed with reference to indicator projects on the international level (UNECE 2005, Ioannidou 2010). The overall research process include four research phases: a document analysis via a desk research (2016-2017), 66 expert interviews from the different educational areas (2017), a quantitative survey (n > 3.000) on the quality and quantity of ESD-implementation from teacher’s and young person’s perspectives (2018) and the replication of the desk research (2018). The results show an increasing implementation of ESD that varies significantly between the different educational areas and federal states (Singer-Brodowski et al., accepted). While the results are published and communicated also towards a non-scientific audience and are used for policy strategies, questions of opportunities and limitations about the standardized procedure of classical monitoring approaches (e.g., Ioannidou 2010) become apparent. As an indicator-based project, these standardized approaches such as a lexical analysis were applied especially in the desk research, with the aim of comparing different federal states and educational areas. Thereby, a reduction of complexity of the database and the reality of ESD-integration had to be undertaken. To deal with this reduction of complexity, the lexical analysis was complemented by some in-depth-analyses for several document types and the interviews. The presentation focusses on reflections about the usage of the results of the different ESD monitoring-phases in the broader community. A positive outcome could be seen in the high visibility the results could create, the possible replication of the desk research and thereby reconstructing trends of ESD in policy relevant documents. A limitation is that often, the underlying reasons and mechanisms of the ESD-implementation are fuzzy and reconstructing causal directions remained a question of interpretation (e.g., in how far political programs or other variables function as causes for an ESD increase). Coming to the science policy interface, it seems challenging to communicate complex issues and avoid simple stories, which are seen especially fruitful for transferring scientific evidence at the science-policy interface (Cairney/ Oliver 2017).

Cairney, P., Oliver, K. (2017): Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy?” Health Research Policy and Systems 15(5): 1-11. Ioannidou, A. (2010): Educational Monitoring and Reporting as Governance Instruments for Evidence-Based Education Policy, in International Educational Governance, edited by K. Amos, 155-172. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Singer-Brodowski, M., Etzkorn, N., Brock, A., Otte, I. (accepted): Monitoring of Education for Sustainable Development in Germany - Insights from Early Childhood Education, School and Higher Education. Environmental Education Research United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) (2005): Indicators for Education for Sustainable Development. Progress Report on the Work of the Expert Group. ECE/CEP/AC.13/2006/5. http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/cep/ac.13/cep.ac.13.2005.9.e.pdf