The purpose of this (position) paper is to shed light on what it might mean to adopt educative aspects of sustainable development in the field of physical education and thus by that calling into question existing cultures and practices (Biesta, 2015). We give an overview of organizational expectations on education for sustainable development. We use this approach to critically reflect on how this focus can both challenge and enable a rethinking and reorientation of physical education and physical education teacher education practices.

In recent decades, the issue of education in relation to sustainable development has received considerable interest at a global organizational level. Education is claimed to have the potential to contribute to the sustainability challenges that humanity faces. This paper will focus on what sustainable development might mean educatively in the field of physical education. Not surprisingly, sustainability and education trigger debates within the education community, some of whose members are comfortable and eager to infuse the term with meaning and address underrepresented issues; others are uncomfortable with the “globalizing” nature of education for sustainable development (ESD). Yet, others recognize limitations to the terminology as it can mask, at the level of common understanding, epistemological layers (Wals & Jickling, 2002).

Sustainability involves several ontological and epistemological layers: what is to be sustained, how, for whom, and by whom (Barker et al., 2014; Lugg, 2007; Sund & Greve Lysgaard, 2013). However, what also has been stated is that exploring educative aspects in relation to education and sustainable development needs to be well anchored in educational philosophy and linked to educational theories to avoid policies appearing disconnected and miseducative and merely as normative statements (Sund & Greve Lysgaard, 2013). Hence, the more specific purpose of this paper is not to debate different definitions but to explore what it might mean to adopt educative aspects of sustainable development, as defined by Agenda 2030 and the SDGs, in the field of PE, thus calling into question existing cultures, content, and practices.

Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals are based on a vision of how we can manage sustainable development issues in our society and environment (United Nations, 2015a, 2015b). As sustainability and environmental issues are about cultural identities, social and environmental equity, respect, social–nature relationships, and tensions around intrinsic and instrumental values, these issues are variable, unstable, and can easily be questioned (Wals & Jickling, 2002, p. 223). Nevertheless, there are reasons to highlight sustainability in order to find a common language to discuss and act in relation to different aspects of sustainability (Wals & Jickling, 2002, pp. 222–223).

A recent literature review focusing on the distinct role of PE in Agenda 2030 and the SDGs resulted in about 4400 papers published between 2015 and March 2021, only three of which met the following inclusion criteria: physical education, SDG, and Agenda 2030 (Fröberg & Lundvall, 2021). Hence, educative aspects of sustainable development seem to be a largely unexplored research area in the field of PE. As policy, discourses and evidence chains vary and differ at times and in the contexts of organized sport and PE, our focus in this paper will be on the latter (Lindsey & Darby, 2019; Lynch & Soukup, 2016).

The methodology used for this position paper is a thorough reading of official documents related to Agenda 2030 and the SDG:s (among those United Nation, 2015; OECD 2019) together with literature related to education for sustainable development (see for example Boström et al., 2018; Lynch & Boylan, 2016; Kioupi & Voulvoulis, 2019). An interpretivist and social constructionist paradigm have guided the reading. In the final section of this paper, we suggest a strategy to open up a process of reorientation and rethinking that can deepen our conversation and strengthen actions vis-à-vis educative aspects of sustainable development in the field of PE.

We suggest three steps for opening a process that can deepen the conversation and strengthen actions in relation to Agenda 2030, the SDGs, and ESD in the field of PE. The suggested steps can be seen as a response to the criticism of (the lack of) quality education in PE and the earlier mentioned absence of research and practice highlighting sustainability and ESD. These steps all encompass the means to consider exploring and concretizing what sustainability as a process and direction can mean. The first step is to critically analyze and revise curricula and steering documents for PETE programs and school PE in each country where the Agenda 2030 perspective and the SDGs are taken into consideration. The second step proposes a rethinking of the learning perspectives in the field of PE to ensure quality PE in terms of building a capacity for change and reflection, practicing values of citizenship, and the ability to put oneself as an individual in relation to, and as part of, the whole. Finally, the third step entails a reorientation of perspectives on health and well-being from a holistic perspective in order to expand teachers’ and students’ skills and knowledge of the interplay and relationship between health and the environment. Our position is that adopting educative aspects of sustainable development in the field of PE both challenges and acknowledges a critical learning perspective. This includes to explore what sustainability can mean in a certain situation and environment where movement and health education are produced, embodied, and performed and where environment is more than a backdrop (Taylor et al., 2016). Taken together, this can both challenge and enable a rethinking and reorientation in PE and offer a new point of departure for innovative teaching and learning processes where sustainability, as a process and direction, is incorporated.

Biesta, G. (2015) What is Education For? On Good Education,Teacher. Judgement, and Educational Professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50, (1), 75-87. Boström, M., Andersson, E., Berg, M., Gustafsson, K., Gustavsson, E., Hysing, E., . . . Öhman, J. (2018). Conditions for Transformative Learning for Sustainable Development: A Theoretical Review and Approach. Sustainability, 10(12). Fröberg, A., & Lundvall, S. (2021). The Distinct Role of Physical Education in the Context of Agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goals: An Explorative Review and Suggestions for Future Work. Sustainability, 13(21), 11900. Kioupi, V., & Voulvoulis, N. (2019). Education for Sustainable Development: A Systemic Framework for Connecting the SDGs to Educational Outcomes. 11(21), 6104. Lindsey, I., & Darby, P. (2018). Sport and the Sustainable Development Goals: Where is the policy coherence? International review for the sociology of sport, 54(7), 793-812. Lynch, T. & Boylan, M. (2016) United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Promoting health and well-being through physical education partnerships. Cogent Education, 3(1). doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1188469 Lynch, T. & Soukup, G. J. (2016). Physical education”, “health and physical education”, “physical literacy” and “health literacy”: Global nomenclature confusion. Cogent Education, 3, 1217820. Lugg, A. (2007). Developing sustainability-literate citizens through outdoorlearning: possibilities for outdoor education in Higher Education, Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 7(2), 97-112. OECD. (2019). Future of Education and Skills 2030: OECD Learning Compass 2030. A series of concepts and notes. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/contact/OECD_Learning_Compass_2030_Concept_Note_Series.pdf. Sund, P. & Greve Lysgaard, J. (2013). Reclaim “Education” in Environmental and Sustainability Education Research. Sustainability (5), pp. 1598-1616. Published: 16 April 2013. Taylor, N.; Wright, J.; O’Flynn, G. (2016). HPE teachers’ negotiation of environmental health spaces: Discursive positions, embodiment and materialism. The Australian Educational Researcher, 43, 361-376 United Nations. Division for Sustainable Development (2015a). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development: A/RES/70/1. New York: United Nations. United Nations. (2015b). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 21 October. A/ RES/70/1. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. Available from https://sustainabledevelopment. un.org/post2015/transformingourworld. Wals, A. E. J., & Jickling, B. (2002). Sustainability in higher education: From doublethink and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3, 221-232. Öhman, J. Sund, L. A. (2021). Didactic Model of Sustainability Commitment. Sustainability, 13, 3083.