In research on sustainability transitions (ST), learning is often considered vital for transforming our world into a more sustainable direction (van Mierlo et al. 2020). Recent reviews of literature (Goyal & Howlett 2020, Van Poeck et al. 2020, van Mierlo & Beers 2020) shed light on why learning is regarded key to foster transitions, what people are assumed to learn in STs, and what are gaps in the currently available scientific knowledge on the topic. ST researchers have been arguing for learning as a prerequisite for the creative development and maturation of novel practices that provide alternatives for currently non-sustainable regimes, for questioning what is taken for granted, for developing shared visions and plans, for creating new knowledge, for disseminating ideas and experiments, for collective problem-solving, etc. (Goyal & Howlett 2020, Van Poeck et al. 2020). As to what is or ought to be learned, reference is made to practical learning outcomes (e.g. more sustainable technologies and practices, innovative solutions for sustainability challenges), conceptual learning outcomes (e.g. new knowledge, commitment, visions, framings), and relational learning outcomes (e.g. new networks, trust) (Van Poeck et al. 2020). The literature reviews of van Mierlo and Beers (2020) and Van Poeck et al. (2020) also reveal important theoretical and empirical research gaps that can be summarised as a poor conceptual and empirical underpinning. This symposium addresses these gaps in the state of the art and aims to contribute to overcoming some of the identified shortcomings.
Van Mierlo and Beers (2020, p. 255) argue that ‘learning processes have hardly been conceptualised, discussed and elaborated within the field’ and sharply criticise the fact that well-established research fields related to learning that could provide valuable insights are ‘broadly ignored or loosely applied’ (Ibid.). Although several authors explicitly refer to learning theories, not all studies apply learning theories and several do it only superficially which results in conceptual haziness and confusion of the process and outcomes of learning (Boon and Bakker 2016, Benson et al. 2016, Beers et al. 2016, Singer-Brodowski et al. 2018, Sol et al. 2018, Van Poeck et al. 2020, Van Poeck & Östman 2021). These observations, van Mierlo et al. (2020, p. 253) argue, highlight the need for conceptual work that goes ‘beyond a superficial use of notions such as social learning and double-loop learning’. Furthermore, the empirical knowledge base for progressing our understanding of learning in STs is weak. Learning is often assumed to take place, but is neither specified nor critically investigated (van Mierlo et al. 2020). Van Poeck et al. (2020) illustrate that many empirical research contributions do not convincingly reveal that, what and how people are learning in practices striving for STs and that, too often, strong claims are made without sufficient empirical evidence.
In this symposium, we present and discuss four papers that – theoretically, methodologically, and empirically – contribute to opening-up the black-box of what and how people learn while trying to tackle sustainability problems. The first paper does so by integrating three conceptual frameworks that deal to a different extent with reflexivity, collective processes, and the role of materials for learning and practices. The second paper presents and illustrates an analytical approach for creating practically useful knowledge on how to facilitate learning in view of STs. The third paper presents empirical investigations on the role of emotions within learning processes in STs. 

Beers, van Mierlo, Hoes, 2016. Toward an Integrative Perspective on Social Learning in System Innovation Initiatives. Ecology and Society, 21(1), 33. Benson, Lorenzoni, Cook, 2016. Evaluating social learning in England flood risk management: an ‘individual-community interaction’ perspective. Environmental Science Policy, 55, 326–334. Boon, Bakker, 2016. Learning to shield – Policy learning in socio-technical transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 181-200. Goyal, Howlett, 2020. Who learns what in sustainability transitions? Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 311-321. Singer-Brodowski, Beecroft, Parodi, 2018. Learning in Real-World Laboratories: A Systematic Impulse for Discussion. Gaia, 27(S1), 23-27. Sol, van der Wal, Beers, Wals, 2018. Reframing the future: the role of reflexivity in governance networks in sustainability transitions. Environmental Education Research, 24(9), 1383-1405. van Mierlo, Beers, 2020. Understanding and governing learning in sustainability transitions: A review. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 255-269. van Mierlo, Beers, Halbe, Scholz, Vinke-de Kruijf, 2020. Learning about learning in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 251-254. Van Poeck, Östman, Block, 2020. Opening up the black box of learning-by-doing in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 34, 298-310. Van Poeck, Östman, 2021. Learning to find a way out of non-sustainable systems. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 39, 155-172.