Governing education for sustainable development in low- and middle-income countries: normative convergence and operational divergence in global education governance

Abstract

Education for Sustainable Development has become an instrument through which international organizations shape national responses to accelerating socio-ecological crises, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This paper presents a theory-driven comparative analysis of three global frameworks shaping ESD governance: UNESCO’s Education for Sustainable Development for 2030 Roadmap, the UNFCCC’s Action for Climate Empowerment and the Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action. The paper conceptualizes these frameworks as an interacting global governance field rather than isolated policy instruments. It argues that divergences in governance logic, institutional design, and operational expectations structure how sustainability commitments are interpreted and enacted. Drawing on qualitative document analysis, the study finds that while the three frameworks converge normatively, they diverge sharply in pedagogical orientation, accountability mechanisms, and assumptions about national institutional and professional capacity. With ESD 2030 emphasizing pedagogical transformation, ACE embedding education within climate governance, and the Incheon FFA situating ESD within broader education reform, distinct and partially misaligned implementation expectations emerge. These divergences generate implementation challenges related to policy coherence, teacher capacity, assessment, and knowledge integration. The study contributes to debates on global education governance by explaining why global consensus on ESD does not translate into coherent national reform pathways, particularly in low- and middle-income contexts.