Book review: Pedagogy of Hope for Global Social Justice: Sustainable futures for people and the planet, edited by Douglas Bourn and Massimiliano Tarozzi

Book review: Pedagogy of Hope for Global Social Justice: Sustainable futures for people and the planet, edited by Douglas Bourn and Massimiliano Tarozzi

London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2023, 288 pp.; ISBNs: 978-13503-2626-2 (hbk); 978-13503-2627-9 (ePDF); 978-13503-2628-6 (ebk)

The editors of Pedagogy of Hope for Global Social Justice Sustainable Futures for People and the Planet, Douglas Bourn and Massimiliano Tarozzi, of the Development Education Research Centre at UCL are the founding members of the Academic Network for Global Education and Learning (ANGEL) and key figures in the field.

Inspired by the work of Brazilian philosopher of education and liberation, Paulo Freire (1921–97), Bourn committed to the establishment of a critical pedagogy focused on hope in the interrelated fields of global education and learning related to development, global citizenship and sustainability. In this volume Bourn and Tarozzi bring together ANGEL researchers from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, Latin America and the UK to share the efforts to develop theory and pedagogy, and to answer empirical challenges in education within their contexts of action, always with a concern for the place of hope.

Freire first mentioned hope in relation to dialogue, a central concept in critical pedagogy. He stated that hope does not imply crossing one’s arms, and waiting, doing nothing, as the word in Portuguese, esperança, suggests at first sight. On the contrary, ‘I move with hope while I struggle and, if I struggle with hope, I wait’ (Freire, 1978, p. 97). Facing a crisis, hope is needed but not sufficient. A progressive educator, through serious political analysis, opens the possibilities for hope needed to strengthen liberatory action (Freire, 1992, p. 11). All contributors to this volume are representatives of a cohort of progressive educators.

In the chapter ‘Introducing Pedagogy of Hope for Global Social Justice’, Tarozzi describes the importance of a pedagogy of hope to global social justice education, necessary ‘to transform social reality and to imagine possible futures’ (p. 1). He underlines the particular hopelessness underscoring young people’s experience under the impact of the socially unjust effects of neoliberal (dis)order and its active promotion of fatalism in the idea that there are no other alternatives beyond itself. Tarozzi resists this, affirming, ‘In this book we believe that a pedagogy of hope is needed to both think of and to achieve global social justice. Hope is necessary in order to conceptualize a global perspective on education that considers equality and social justice as imperative’ (p. 3).

Tarozzi reviews understandings of the concepts of hope and utopia by and beyond Paulo Freire, from Greco-Latin mythology to Catholic teachings, Ernst Bloch and notions of the need for optimism from Bertolini and Gramsci. He also describes the contents of the book, divided into three parts: ‘Conceptualizing Hope and Global Social Justice’, ‘Global Perspectives on Global Social Justice’ and ‘Applying Global Social Justice’. The book comprises 14 chapters by authors from Africa, America, Asia and Europe, and a ‘Conclusion’ chapter by Bourn.

The division into parts is conventional; most, if not all chapters, in some form and in differing depth and approaches, address the conceptualisations of hope with concerns for global social justice and examples of the specific implementation of hopeful and social justice projects. The reader should expect concepts related to these topics throughout the book.

Carlos Alberto Torres provides an ample view of these concepts in ‘Global Citizenship Education and Sustainability as Real Utopias’ (in Part I), indicating that understandings of hope and global social justice require the concept of a ‘real utopia’, visions of ‘alternatives to existing structures of power, privilege and inequality’ that are ‘pragmatically possible’ (pp. 13–14). Torres shows the contradictions among the various levels and roles of the capitalist state. He summarises capitalist schooling as reproducing inequalities and authoritarian relationships of class, race, gender and sexuality; as not being able to counteract consumerist commodification of social relations; and as having lost its edge in the socialisation and instruction of youth. Torres points to the need for new utopias to balance reproduction and liberation. He leaves us with questions to consider about the twin Global Citizenship Education/Sustainable Development Goals (GCE/SDGs), and refers to the poet Martin Espada, citing Eduardo Galeano, to discuss hope in the Freirian sense of action: ‘“What good is utopia? That’s what: it’s good for walking.” Even if we don’t get where we want to go, the vision moves us in the direction of justice, and ultimately makes for a more just society’ (p. 26).

In the chapter ‘Decolonizing Citizenship, Becoming Planetary with Paulo Freire’s Hope-in-Action in Brazilian Education’ (in Part II), by Moraes, Albuquerque and Oliveira, the authors situate themselves as representatives of the Global South being researchers from the state of Ceará, in the Northeast of Brazil. They propose to decolonise citizenship ‘through a form of citizenship that crosses geographical and epistemological borders’ (p. 142): planetary citizenship. They aim to materialise Paulo Freire’s proposal for humanisation through the Permanent Curriculum Seminar programme at their university, where students and professors gather for presentations of ongoing research or to conduct dialogue circles on epochal themes. Indigenous and marginalised knowledge of Afro-Brazilians are at the centre of these efforts towards decolonisation in this form of citizenship.

Yoko Mochizuki poses another insightful analysis of the conditions of education under neoliberalism, with a clear view of Freirean hope in the chapter ‘Transformative Social and Emotional Learning and Digital Learning for Global Citizenship Education Limits and Possibilities’ (in Part III). Mochizuki critically examines the focus on social emotional learning (SEL), including notions of well-being, as a pedagogical approach in education for sustainable development and global citizenship education as related to equity, social justice and change. She questions the behavior turn in governments and international organisations. Behaviour interventions, especially digital ones, are comparatively low-cost for scaling up, leading away from the traditional suspicion about the dehumanising impact of technology. She affirms, ‘From philosophical and sociological viewpoints, I problematise the foundational claim “well-being is a skill” as an ideological basis for Education for Sustainable Development/Global Citizenship Education, using the lenses of “learnification” (Biesta, 2005, 2006), “datafication” (Williamson, 2019) and “happinisation” (Zembylas, 2020) of education’ (p. 163). She continues to critically examine these neoliberal facets of contemporary education.

Mochizuki makes explicit this book’s distinguishing perspective on global social justice and hope, and perhaps sketches some ideas of how to devise the new utopias that Torres asks for to balance reproduction and liberation:

we need an open and transparent platform – digital and otherwise – not hijacked by corporate or political agendas. A ‘pedagogy of hope’ in the twenty-first century should rest in cultivating the uniquely human capacity to override our biological and genetic drives by way of learning to think more deliberately, collectively and critically and joining forces to co-create a world that is based on universal values of justice, equality and freedom. The hope comes from collectives with a vision and commitment that social change is possible, not from atomized individuals in despair – or even individuals who have become the best versions of themselves thanks to SEL, if it simply means becoming better able to cope with the world as it exists. (p. 169)

In the chapter ‘Global Values in School Curricula’, Scheunpflug and colleagues present well justified arguments with empirical research findings on teachers’ understanding of privilege and positionality, which are key to critical global education and learning. The authors conclude that everyone – especially those in the teaching profession – needs to be aware of their privileged positions and to have the competency to consider what is the norm or ‘normal’ that is attainable and to understand those who are less privileged. It remains for readers to consider what can, and needs, to be done to reduce or close the gap between the less and more privileged.

In summary, the book offers a wide perspective of the idea of a pedagogy of hope and its importance in education aiming towards global social justice. It is particularly good that the authors are from different parts of the world. However, contrary to the promising book title, the main themes are unevenly addressed across the chapters and their connection to the pedagogy of hope for global social justice could have been clearer. The editors conclude by highlighting the importance of theoretical debates, research across contexts and educators’ role as optimists and inspirers in this world of uncertainties and injustices. It is easy to agree that hope needs to be part of learning, and the chapters offer new information about what that means theoretically and in practice, drawing on Freire’s exploration of both and the dialogue between them.

The quality of the volume would have benefitted from more careful editing as in some of the contributions opinions are given without justification and argumentation. In this complex field, we need to be cautious when editing future publications about drawing conclusions related to the pedagogy of hope for global social justice to contribute to meaningful knowledge.