This presentation elaborates on how governmentality (Foucault 1991) becomes part of education of young children through educational policies and curricula for education for sustainable development (ESD). Rose & Miller (2010) elaborates on governmentality in the field of education, and relate to three different, though intertwined, levels: political rationalities, programmes of government and technologies of government.

The aim of the overall research project is to contribute to understanding of how political reforms and pedagogical models allow and not allow different subject positions in Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). Which sustainability problems are presented as important to solve? Who should solve them? Which activities and declared intentions are expressed through the educational policies? According to this, subject positions may be described as "desirable" or “undesirable” within the discourse. Furthermore, are there subject positions that are left outside (silenced by) the discourse?

The following is based on an empirical study, designed as a discourse analysis of policy documents for the Swedish compulsory school. Preliminary results suggest that ‘the desirable child’ (Popkewitz 2007) is a good student leading an ‘exemplary life’ in terms of environmental awareness and competency to act for ‘the best of the future’. Children are hence referred to as ‘problem-solving agents’ with an individual responsibility to be knowledgeable and to act for ‘the common good’ (cf. Larsson et al 2010).

It is, however, unclear in which context and under which circumstances such education can be implemented, shared and, not least, assessed. The implications for practical teaching are obvious, as certain situations as well as lifestyles are considered ‘unsustainable’, and therefore ‘less desirable’. Although with (possibly) good intentions, political technologies represented by curricula and syllabi, may imply clearly excluding practices that are both authoritative and selective.

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that environmental issues – a field defined by risk and uncertainty (see e g Eden 1998, Sundquist and Elam 2009) – are a prime mover for designing ‘a better future’. Therefore, an analysis will be made to focus on the role of 'undecidables', i e words/concepts with a double (or unsettled) meaning that are common in these documents - such as 'communication' and 'difference' - and how these relate to vague/disputed concepts as 'democracy', 'inclusion', 'sustainable development' and 'inter/intra-generational equity'.

Referring to the ‘political rationalities’ imposed on education, this suggests that education for sustainable development has a moral impetus, as well as it is trapped in a complex epistemology. In addition, it is expressed by its own idiom (Rose & Miller 2010). This idiom (language) is characterized by vagueness and,seen from the perspective of deconstruction of texts and their meaning, undecidability (Norval 2004). This undecidability reinforces governmentality as an invisible, although ever-present, trait in education.

Eden, S: 1998. Environmental issues: knowledge, uncertainty and the environment. Progress in Human Geography 22 (3), pp. 425-432 Foucault, M: 1991. 'Governmentality'. In: Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon and Peter Miller (eds): The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, pp. 87–104. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (original text translated by Rosi Braidotti and revised by Colin Gordon) Larsson, B; Andersson, M and Osbeck, C: 2010. Bringing environmentalism home. Children’s influence on family consumption in the Nordic countries and beyond. Childhood Vol. 17(1): 129–147. Norval, A J: 2004. Hegemony after deconstruction: the consequences of undecidability. Journal of Political Ideologies (June 2004), 9(2), 139–157 Popkewitz, T: 2007. Cosmopolitanism and the age of school reform: Science, education and making society by making the child. New York: Routledge. Rose, N and P, Miller: 2010. Political power beyond the State: problematics of government. British Journal of Sociology, 61 (1). pp. 271-303 Sundquist, G and M Elam: 2009. Sociologin, hybriderna och den sociala verkligheten – exemplet kärnavfall. Sociologisk Forskning, årgång 46, nr 2, pp. 4-25