For several decades, educational research has explored the potential of adult learning to address the ongoing ecological crisis (e.g. National institut for adult continuing education 1993, Hautecour 2000, Walters et al 2022). While the importance of studying how learning can help navigate the challenges of human impact on life’s cohabitation on Earth is widely recognized, efforts to link educational concepts to this issue have remained a niche concern among a small group of experts. These specialists have sought to elevate the topic’s relevance and urgency within broader educational debates. However, discussions on general theories of  (adult) learning and education have largely taken place in other academic fora.

As highlighted in Network 30’s special call for contributions, this division of labor is undergoing a significant shift in the recent years. Scholars focused on general theories of (adult) learning increasingly recognize learning in the context of the ecological crisis as a fundamental issue. At the same time, discussions within environmental education are engaging more deeply with general learning theories. From the perspective of general learning theories, learning in the ecological crisis appears as a relevant case of practical application. Conversely, within environmental education, general learning theories serve as frameworks for reflection and theoretical expansion. 

The analysis starts from the observation, that these two research areas—adult learning theory and environmental education—have remained largely disconnected over a long period of time. Foundational questions about learning and its facilitation (Illeris, 2018; Göhlich, Wulf & Zirfas, 2014) have been typically discussed in a different academic realm than those concerning environmental education (Stephenson et al., 2013; Lange, 2010). In such moments, in which general theories of learning are related to question of environmental education these two fields begin to reference each other and a boundary zone emerges—one that both communities engage with, albeit from distinct vantage points.

The papers aims for a better understanding of what happens in this boundary dynamics. It investigates instances where scholars reference concepts from the respective other academic field, revealing how these interactions shape evolving academic boundaries. By analyzing two recently published articles that relate general adult learning concepts to ecological education (Kallia, 2024; Dinkelaker & Stimm, 2024), this paper examines how the relationship between these two discourses shifts when new learning theories are drawn on in environmental education debates. This analysis draws on the concept of boundary work (Star & Griesemer, 1989; Star, 2010) to examine how these discourses are both distinguished from and connected to one another. The examined essays function as boundary objects—referenced in both academic contexts but interpreted differently. This perspective clarifies that mainstreaming environmental education can take two distinct forms: integrating general educational concepts into environmental education discourse, and incorporating environmental education concerns into broader discussions on learning theories.

By shedding light on these dynamics the proposed paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the ongoing mainstreaming of environmental education within educational sciences. It also provides insights for more strategic and targeted interventions in this evolving academic landscape.

The proposed paper draws on the concept of social worlds (Strauss, 1978) to analyze the relationship between two subfields in education research: adult learning theory and environmental education. When we understand these subfields as social worlds, we can observe, how they each function as distinct yet interconnected social contexts, each structured by its own core activities, assumptions, and recognized actors. While some individuals navigate between them, their respective academic communities remain largely separate. To examine their interactions, I apply the concept of translation (Gal, 2015; Dinkelaker & Wenten, 2024), which refers to “the expression in one semiotic system of what has been said, written, or done in another.” Gal 2015, 227. This analysis explores how learning is framed differently within general educational theories and within theories of learning in the ecological crisis, as well as how concepts of learning developed in one context change their form and meaning while being applied to the other. The paper investigates these dynamics using two recently published articles. Cultivating the Biophilic Self: Urpo Harva as a Theorist of Environmental Adult Education (Kallio, 2024) examines how ecological issues are addressed in the work of Finnish educational researcher Urpo Harva. The Climate Crisis as an Impetus for Learning (Stimm & Dinkelaker, 2024) applies the German-language generic concept of “learning occasions” to analyze learning processes in the ecological crisis. The analysis proceeds in two steps. First, I examine which debates and scholars these articles reference and how these references establish links and distinctions between general learning theories and environmental education. Second, I compare their approaches, focusing on how learning is conceptualized both in general and within the specific context of the ecological crisis. Special attention is given to shifts in reception and interpretation when the reference shifts from one academic subfield to the other. Using the concept of boundary work (Star/Grieseme, 1989) I analyze how distinctions between the involved academic discourses are established, maintained, and reconfigured. Applying translation (Gal, 2015), I analyze how concepts of learning evolve when introduced into new contexts, retaining core elements while adapting to different frameworks.

The insights from this paper open strategic opportunities for shaping interventions in educational research. While the general learning theories, which are discussed in the scrutinized papers, focus on the relationship between learning and the individual learner’s life (biography) the debated concepts of learning in the ecological crisis emphasize the relationship between learning and the shared foundations of life on Earth (biology). By triangulating these both kinds of relating life and learning, the blind spots of each of both perspectives become noticeable. On one hand, environmental education benefits from borrowing additional theoretical frameworks for analyzing its subject matter. On the other hand, general education theories gain an opportunity to challenge and refine their models of learning through the lens of the issue of ecological sustainability. Applying general learning theories offers a dual benefit for the study of learning in ecological contexts. First, such interventions broaden the range of scholars being related to the debated topic. Second, they introduce new perspectives that enhance the understanding of the complex challenges involved in fostering ecological learning. At the same time, such cross-boundary considerations contribute to broader discussions on general learning theories. Confronting general theories with the specific conditions of learning in face of severe ecological disruptions raises fundamental questions in need of consideration in further debates about adult learning in general. The translational perspective adopted in this study underscores that the process of interrelating learning theories and concepts of environmental education is not a mere convergence of previously separate debates. Rather, it constitutes a renewal and redefinition of their relationship, maintaining their differences while fostering deeper engagement. The goal is not to dissolve disciplinary boundaries but to cultivate meaningful boundary relationships.

Dinkelaker, J., & Wenten, C. A. (Eds.). (2024). Translations and participation: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. Bielefeld: transcript. Gal, S. (2015). Politics of translation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 44, 225–240. Göhlich, M., Wulf, C., & Zirfas, J. (2014). Pädagogische Theorien des Lernens (2nd ed.). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. Hautecoeur, J.-P. (2000). Ecological Education in Everyday Life. ALPHA 2000. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Illeris, K. (2018). Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists in their own words (2nd ed.). Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Kallio, J. (2024). Cultivating the biophilic self: Urpo Harva as a theorist of environmental adult education. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 15(2), 159–178. Lange, E. A. (2010). Environmental adult education: A many-voiced landscape. In C. E. Kasworm, A. D. Rose, & J. M. Ross-Gordon (Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 305–315). Los Angeles: Sage. National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (1993): Learning for the Future: Adult Learning and the Environment. A NIACE Policy Discussion Paper. Leicester: NIAC. Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(5), 601–617. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. Stevenson, R. B., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Wals, A. E. J. (Eds.). (2013). International handbook of research on environmental education. New York: Routledge. Strauss, A. (1978). A social world perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 1, 119–128. Stimm, M., & Dinkelaker, J. (2024). The climate crisis as an impetus for learning: Approaching environmental education from learners’ perspectives. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 15(3), 281–297. Walter, S., Kotze, A. v., O’Neil, J. K. P., Burt, J., February, C. & Clover, D. (2022). Towards an emergent curriculum for climate justice adult educators/activists. Australian Journal of Adult Learning 62(3), 298-324.