Educating for Public Happiness and Global Peace: Contributions from a Portuguese UNESCO Chair towards the Sustainable Development Goals

Abstract

For a positive global future, it is fundamental to tackle the existing web of psychological, economic, sociological, and cultural processes reflected in current education systems. Confronted with complex issues that are essential to the stability of civilizations, we need more voices addressing a critical analysis of education in its key role. This can result in more people participating as happy, informed, and engaged citizens. This paper introduces the argument for education to promote public happiness (Felicitas Publica) and support global peace, addressing the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) #3, #4, and #16. It begins by mapping the landscape of promising education-related practices supporting these SDGs and provides recommendations for research and actions. In addition, it presents the work of the UNESCO Chair on Education for Global Peace Sustainability, based at the Universidade de Lisboa, in Portugal, as an illustrative example. With this paper, we hope to convey the input of different branches of psychology that have the common good as their aim and address the positive transformation of our current educational processes.

1. Introduction

For decades, issues in education have been conceived of as merely didactic or pedagogic, and mainly supported by studies in psychology. These studies addressed content (what to teach) and methods (how to teach) [1]. It took years to address the conditions of education beyond the classroom—such as the household, social background, equality of opportunities, and society at large. When questioning structural reforms of the school and curricula, the debate also introduced a broader perspective. Consequently, education came to be understood as an asset in national and international development. This standpoint endorsed studies on how education delivers economic profits to both the individual and society [2]. We can identify several paradigms of education—behavioral, cognitive, humanistic, cognitive-constructivist, social-constructivist, transformative, etc.—constantly evolving in ways that influence its purpose, design, practice, and policies [1].

Quality education promotes knowledge and inventiveness and guarantees the acquisition of foundational skills—such as literacy, numeracy, analytical problem solving—and different high-level, abstract, and reflexive rational skills [3]. However, there is a need for an education paradigm that develops interpersonal, emotional, and social skills, and the abilities, values, and attitudes that qualify citizens to experience healthy and happy lives. This paper wants to contribute to the transformative paradigm, which positions learners and teachers as participants in knowledge conception, empowering them to see their place in the world through an ethical lens, and therefore, prepared to challenge the status quo as agents of change [4].

The question raised here is “how can we design and implement formal and informal educational processes committed to a greater good?”. This paper supports the argument for a transformative education paradigm that goes beyond one of transmission of knowledge. It defends the promotion of public happiness (Felicitas Publica) and global peace as complementary dimensions enabling that specific realization and those of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Data from diverse subdisciplines of psychology—positive psychology, educational psychology, community psychology, social psychology, peace psychology, political psychology—support this. The paper discusses the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its associated projects and goals concerning education; specifically, it looks at SDG #3 (ensure a healthy life and promote wellbeing for all at all ages), SDG #4 (ensure quality, inclusive, and equitable education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all), and SDG #16 (promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels), discussing them in relation to education. To illustrate the selected SDGs, the paper presents a UNESCO Chair ongoing at the Universidade de Lisboa, attending to its scope, purposefulness, and values. Lastly, the paper addresses specific educational targets and models we consider as valid paths for attaining individual and social assets, ending with conclusions and proposals for a future research agenda.

2. Literature Review: Contextualization

2.1. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the SDGs

The United Nations (UN), in its General Assembly of 25 September 2015 [5], established the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The agenda included 17 SDGs with 169 targets, in an ambition to institute a plan of action to promote world peace, the eradication of poverty, the protection of the planet, human rights for all, gender equality, and sustainable development in its three dimensions: social, economic, and environmental.

Education is at the heart of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and it is essential for the success of all SDGs. It can accelerate the achievement of each goal. After analyzing the progress made towards the Education for All (EFA) Monitoring Report (2015) [6], the education-related Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the declaration of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005) [7], the more recent Global Action Program on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) (2014), and the Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action (2015) [8], we find it unquestionable that great progress has been made in the past 20 years. Nevertheless, it is also clear that the world is still far from reaching the established aims of transforming lives through education.

After examining the UNESCO project Futures of Education, on how knowledge and learning can shape the future of humanity and the planet [9], and exploring the World Economic Forum education program (WEF) [10], dedicated to defining new and promising quality models of education for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, we can identify a tendency to use a competencies framework and a future-oriented perspective of education. Both intend to promote “personal, interpersonal and project-oriented skill-building and growth” [11] (p. 15). Furthermore, in the UNICEF Education Strategy Every Child Learns 2019–2030 [12] (p. 4), it is stated that “The gap between the levels of learning that education systems are providing and what children, communities and economies need, is growing. The breadth and depth of this learning crisis provides the greatest global challenge to preparing children and adolescents for life, work and active citizenship”. In parallel, the Global Compact on Education (2019) [13], promoted by the Vatican and Pope Francis, aims to create a global alliance for the future of humanity, as much as for our common home. In the launch of the project, Pope Francis highlighted that “Never before has there been such need to unite our efforts in a broad educational alliance, to form mature individuals capable of overcoming division and antagonism, and to restore the fabric of relationships for the sake of a more fraternal humanity” [14].

Although the world has made some extraordinary improvements in education since 2000—when the six Education for All (EFA) objectives and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) [15] were founded—unfortunately, those goals were not attained by the 2015 deadline. More recently, and regrettably, the global health pandemic risks to wipe out several decades of progress. As a consequence, insistent action is required to achieve the uncompleted program.

Among the 17 SDGs, this paper highlights three goals of extreme importance towards this urgent educational agenda: #3, #4, and #16.

SDG #3—Ensure a healthy life and promote wellbeing for all at all ages. As indicated in the SDG Compass, “Health is a fundamental human right and a key indicator of sustainable development. Poor health threatens the rights of children to education, limits economic opportunities for men and women and increases poverty within communities and countries around the world” [16]. With the urgency and seriousness of major physical health issues, promoting wellbeing—a topic present in this SDG—is undervalued. Furthermore, the pervasiveness of mental disorders is on the rise amid the populations of Western developed countries, e.g., [17]. In addition, a robust association has been found between physical and mental health, e.g., [18]. Behavioral and emotional issues impact the learning process in the younger generation, threating the equitable and inclusive education targets. While the link between positive education and SDG #3 is apparent, there is room for improvement towards a more eudaimonic view of wellbeing. Further in the text, we explore what actions are being taken in this regard.

SDG #4—Ensure quality, inclusive and equitable education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Education is a fundamental human right and is indispensable for the achievement of sustainable development. It is only possible to empower girls, combat climate change, fight inequality, and end extreme poverty through education. In this paper, special attention is given to sub-goal #4.7, as “providing access to quality education breaks the cycle of poverty, reduces inequalities between genders, races and religious beliefs, and promotes tolerance for world peace” [16]. This goal, and particularly its subgoal, can contribute to public happiness and to peace, which we will discuss further in the next sections concerning the actions being taken.

SDG #16—Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. Education, business, social cohesion, and the emergence of social solutions for new challenges, “all thrive in peaceful environments with effective institutions where operating practices are predictable, human relations are dignifying and environments are stable” [16]. Peace education is a fundamental topic that we will also discuss in the following sections, particularly linking it to relational and collaborative learning.

As an illustrative and practical example, we will present the UNESCO Chair on Education for Global Peace Sustainability (E=GPS) situated at the Universidade de Lisboa, since it is a project that tries to epitomize values and pragmatics of the transformative approach to education, where collective and individual wellbeing, far-reaching educational approaches, and peace are addressed. Furthermore, we will debate different approaches to education as transformative action-oriented for the common good, in propositions centered around non-academic competencies. All are supported by psychological research, although they might also integrate other scientific domains.

2.2. The Transformational Learning Paradigm

Transformative experiences lead us to think differently and can also modify our beliefs and worldviews [19]. Transformational learning is conceptualized as involving a fundamental change in frames of reference, considering people as free and accountable. Furthermore, it reflects knowledge as well as individual and social concepts, and believes in a liberal democratic society focused on construing meaning from experience as a guide to action [20]. Transformational learning includes three dimensions: psychological (changes in understanding of the self), convictional (revision of belief systems), and behavioral (changes in lifestyle) [21]. The transformational perspective on education needs to go further, advancing beyond an emphasis on individual agency and considering the context, values, and the social systems in which the learners are imbedded, as well as the link between meaning and practice [20].

Debates addressing the role of emotions, social contexts and relationships, cultural connections, and creativity, in general, continue to influence the progress of the transformational learning theory [22]. Faced with the current societal challenges, these diverse paradigms and scientific debates give us an opening to monitor the dominant models of learning and teaching. In addition, they allow us to revisit the goals of education for the 21st century and to build not just human capital for economic growth but to create global citizens for universal happiness. This implies making conscious and virtuous decisions, and to act responsibly and ethically to deal with today’s personal, local, and global challenges. As described in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Program on ESD [23] (p. 7): “To create a world that is more just, peaceful and sustainable, all individuals and societies must be equipped and empowered by knowledge, skills and values as well as be instilled with a heightened awareness to drive such change”.

A fundamental reason behind this aim of rethinking education is that the mere logic of finance, profitability, productivity, and preparation for the job market is not adequate and sufficient per se. It has been corroding the construction of virtuous ethic and radical humanity in the education and training domains [24]. Therefore, most of the current educational values and processes are not supportive—or are even detrimental—to attaining the SDGs. These should be regarded as an instrument for individual and collective empowerment, leading to new intuitions, visions and solutions, and better actionability [11].

Contemporary developed societies and pedagogical methods are mainly rooted in fierce individualism [25]. Current educational politics and practices are embedded in a certain understanding of the self and human ontology, as well as in normative preconceptions of what the formal and informal educational processes imply [26]. The person is, therefore, considered as a separate entity that is completely self-sufficient, disconnected from the context, and driven by egoistic motives [27]. These assumptions, if unaddressed, may continue to give rise to an ideology that constrains our appreciation of different realities, menacing the respect and honor of the diversity of human experience.

Another reason behind this aim of rethinking education is that, in the decision-making processes, regulations, and subsequent socio-political, economic, and pedagogical practices (test-driven, programed for good end results, profit-oriented, meritocratic, socially anemic), education and training are treated not as investment goods (assets), but as consumption goods (costs) [28]. A further reason is that we are seeing the unprecedented emergence of narratives about the need of a paradigm shift in the educational territory: new proposals, platforms, manifestos, and pedagogical models echo and corroborate each other’s grounds and values. These visions resonate with claims to articulate the value of the educational efforts within a broader humanistic context that makes it more relevant to present-day society’s needs and goals. Several of these propositions defend the interplay between education and the hopeful 2030 Agenda and its 17 SDGs. These projects recognize the central role of education in the improvement and preparation of future citizens and in the keeping of democracy, and have in common the fact that they develop in networks, advocate participatory organizing tools along with new technologies, and integrate distinct groups and requests. They are often consolidated through horizontal, democratic, inter-group, and systemic processes [29].

3. Method

To advance education in a transformative direction, a UNESCO Chair was created at the Universidade de Lisboa: the UNESCO Chair on Education for Global Peace Sustainability (E=GPS). It is a four-year project, renewable each year, and validated by the UNESCO Headquarters in 2018. E=GPS has been a path to articulate narratives and practices devoted to the 2030 Agenda. It brings together within its competences four main lines of action: applied scientific research, advanced education and training, praxis innovation, and dissemination. It is a participatory and co-constructed project that seeks to promote scientific and practical approaches to the complexity of peace, wellbeing, quality of life, and education, at various levels: individual, collective, national, and international. Therefore, it implies close collaboration among diverse national and international stakeholders [30].

The key objectives of the E=GPS include [31]:

• Innovative and inclusive education and training (throughout online learning, teacher’s training, school interventions, and postgraduate courses);
• Supervised practices through workshops and laboratories;
• Running of observatories aimed at identifying resources and needs;
• Creation, monitoring, and evaluation of practical tools for education (games, mobile applications, etc.);
• Fostering of research practices;
• Co-construction and dissemination of knowledge;
• Celebrating good practices (in research, publication, and action);
• Encouraging multidisciplinary relationships among several domains—culture, arts, humanities, social and political sciences, education, technology and the media.

Its principles defend that every intervention has diverse stakeholders in co-creation. They intend to (1) bring hope to people regarding the future; (2) be action-oriented, while also thought-provoking; (3) be marked by dialogue, collaborative and participative, evoking horizontal relationships and co-leadership; (4) create networks supported in diversity and inclusion; (5) involve scientific foundations and action-research methods; (6) bring a critical stance regarding the status quo in education through creative and innovative approaches; and (7) serve the local communities while spread globally [30,31,32]. Overall, the project has been involved (by 2021) in 54 conferences, webinars, and workshops; 10 training programs; and the organization of two books and six book chapters, among other outcomes.

As previously mentioned, the project aspires to deal with the future of education through different approaches, all targeted at SDG #4, but also encompassing SDG #3 and SDG #16. In the following sections, we specify how we addressed each goal by providing examples of the E=GPS project and the description of some of the actions taken therein.

Analysis of Pre and Post-Training of the “Positive Education” Course

The research hereby presented, selected from among other research projects included in the E=GPS, was carried out in the phenomenological design of qualitative research methods. The study group consisted of 84 teachers who completed three editions of courses on “Positive Education”, devoted to enhancing knowledge and behavior change on the domains of peace and public happiness. In between training sessions (in a total of five), teachers were asked to implement projects or initiatives associated with public happiness and positive peace. The first edition of the course involved 30 teachers (85% female, average age of 44), the second edition included 36 teachers (75% female, average age of 52), and the third edition included 18 teachers (90% female, average age of 47). Teachers explained the concepts of peace and public happiness before the beginning of the course, indicating what they were implementing in their personal life and work to put both into practice. After 15 h of an online training on those topics, using science as a rigorous basis for diverse practical approaches and proposals—addressing themes such as relational goods, compassion, empathy, character strengths, non-violent communication, eudaimonic and hedonic happiness, and global citizenship, among others—the teachers were asked to again explain the same concepts and describe eventual new practices, implemented as a consequence of the training (Appendix A). A comparative content analysis of the pre-training and post-training concepts’ explanation and implementation in daily and professional life allowed us to identify changes in concept definition and also in practice implementation (Appendix B). In the following sections, we present this study’s contextualization and results in more detail.

4. The Quest for Individual and Collective Wellbeing: Addressing SDG #3

4.1. Positive Education as a Path to Mental and Physical Health

Neoliberalism affects the telos of education by redefining its meaning and commodifying its central value. It accentuates transferable skills and competencies, while disregarding non-monetary values, indispensable in enduring a healthy democratic society [33,34]. Under this model, economic growth is undebatable and obtained at the expense of the quality of the relational and ecological environment, therefore bringing a potential negative effect on individual and collective happiness [35,36]. Positive education is trying to tackle this issue. Defined as the incorporation of positive psychology into education models, it is the combination of traditional education principles and academic success with the study and optimization of happiness and wellbeing [32]. In particular, the movement embraces the implementation of happiness models and a “character strengths” approach. A school curriculum that includes psychological wellbeing will enhance the possibilities to prevent depression, increase life satisfaction, boost social responsibility, uphold creativity, and enhance resilience, while raising academic success [37]. Regarding character strengths, education has long been nurturing positive virtuousness growth [38]. Yet, only after the publication of “Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification” by Peterson and Seligman [39], the endorsement of character strengths began providing a cross-cultural relevant framework “for educating the heart” [40] (p. 65). Until then, the programs derived from the partiality of cultural, religious, or political perspectives [41].

Education is certainly considered as a key engine of economic growth and social mobility, and it has been associated with many personal and social welfare paybacks, namely greater income, improved health, and better longevity, e.g., [28]. It is considered a critical feature that defines the productivity of a country [28,42]. Although the prevailing research on the relation between education and happiness has produced a mixed list of findings [43], education seems to be positively correlated with subjective wellbeing and has been associated with superior happiness [28]. It has shown that subjective wellbeing helps forecast social behaviors that others value—for instance, individuals with higher happiness scores are subsequently more generous when deciding how much money to give to others; equally, happier individuals volunteer more [44]. Flavin and Keane [45] underline a relationship between subjective wellbeing and political participation. Moreover, De Neve and colleagues [46] note that happier people are, in general, more cooperative and more sociable.

Proven links between wellbeing and social relationships include minor rates of anxiety and depression, greater self-esteem, higher empathy, better resilience, and more trusting and cooperative affiliations [28]. Healthy and harmonious relationships can also benefit the immune system and may even contribute to a longer life expectancy [46]. Wellbeing and mental health are, therefore, a central theme, from the point of view of the individual, but also from the perspective of the human systems where they participate. Defined as “a state of wellbeing in which every individual realizes their own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to their community” [12], mental health is directly addressed by the positive education movement and by positive psychology.

The link between positive education and SDG #3 is, therefore, clear. Nevertheless, there is room for improvement inside this movement to go beyond a more individualistic, hedonic, and intrapsychic perspective and embrace a systemic and eudaimonic view of wellbeing. There is already a tendency inside the subdiscipline of positive psychology towards that direction [31]. Recently, positive psychology has moved into its Third Wave (the First focused research on strengths instead of weaknesses and disease; the Second was about embracing the negative while potentiating the positive). This more recent Third Wave is now paying attention to the happiness of sociality [47,48,49].

4.2. Relational Goods and Public Happiness: From Individual to Collective Wellbeing

Beyond the disagreement over definitions of what happiness is, philosophers and researchers generally agree that happiness is something that matters to us from a subjective perspective [50]. More recently, happiness has been addressed from the perspective of the citizen, or the person in relation. Public happiness/Felicitas Publica includes elements from Latin economic perspectives, namely the Italian movement of Civil Economy. Felicitas, the Latin word for a life of value, has an etymology that implies fertility and virtuousness. Felicitas is, therefore, a common good mediated by relational goods and by the ethos of the market [51].

The complex concept of Aristotelic eudaimonia is the root of public happiness [51]. It has a “social” nature, and it is a result of the practice of virtues. Interpreted and translated as “human flourishing”, eudaimonia means the fulfilment of the genuine and good nature of the person. Such fulfilment is not reached by pursuing individual and hedonic happiness, but only reached within the context of community—the Greek polis—and requires participation in the civil and political life of the city. It also implies friendship, where fraternal, reciprocating, and gratuitous elements emerge. Hence, only in the polis, and only within friendship, can a person accomplish their inner purpose (telos) and be ethical and virtuous.

This relational model, an alternative to the more individualistic, Anglo-Saxon, and hedonistic wellbeing approaches, is complementary of the Stoic appropriation theory, specifically linked to the Greek concept of oikeiosis (in Latin: conciliatio, conciliation). Oikeiosis is ingrained in the term oikos, the Greek word for house, family, or household, and is an element of words such as economics, oikonomics, and ecology. It arouses the awareness of being “at home” and implies a sense of belonging. It is sketched on concentric circles, linking the non-alienated self-acceptance with two other spheres of human action: the first is significant others (family members, friends, colleagues), and the second is the polis. The social ethics and responsibility that bound the individual life of the non-alienated person with the civic life is, therefore, at the heart of the theory. The remoteness from the center is a standard by which we can quantify the strength of our ties and duties towards other fellow members of the community [30,32,52].

The concept of public happiness brings us to the concept of relational goods. They have been defined as non-instrumental interpersonal relations, that is, the affective/expressive side of interpersonal relationships [25,35,51]. Relational goods can only be enjoyed jointly with other co-participants (unlike conventional goods), are characterized by intrinsic attributes, and cannot be exchanged through markets [53]. Therefore, the concept refers to one’s quantity and quality of relational experience with other people and concerns relationships that are intrinsically motivated [54]. The quality of genuineness of relational goods is also relevant, since the relationship is the reward itself. If we fake sympathy or empathy, we lose the non-instrumental value of these goods [55]. Trusting others is a good example of the universal public benefits of relational goods [56], and of the value of the coordination needed to produce a social event.

Although education is essentially a social activity, the delivery of learning and teaching processes is frequently one based on solipsism (the theory that only the self exists), and participants—and their performance—are mostly considered in isolation. The activity itself is conveyed and experienced as a consumption good, and can be considered an instrumental social event, since the market is the medium through which the activity is implemented (either in the private or the public educational context). Apart from being an economic transaction, with a clear aim towards an extrinsic goal (having good grades, finding a good job, earning good money, having an upright social standing), student or school rankings and other kinds of educational competition became the product of market forces [57]. Bringing forward the interpersonal dimension of the economic reality of education, and foreseeing schools, classrooms, recess spaces, teacher–student and teacher–parent relationships as interdependent and non-instrumental, puts the focus on the relevance of the quality of the “encounter” [57].

The recent concept of relational welfare is also worth mentioning here. “Relational welfare is a human-centered and collaborative approach premised on human rights, social justice and societal sustainable development. Relational welfare means that welfare is a resource that people co-create together, where personal and collective relationships and environments are placed at the center of development. The objective of relational welfare is enabling wellbeing for all throughout empowering and capacity enhancement—in people, amid people, in communities and organizations—by involving private, public, and civil players to cooperate and share all kinds of capitals, from knowledge to material resources. Hence, relational welfare interventions imply a communal mission across actors, sectors, and organizations, endowing whole-of-society tactics and a collective impact” [58] (p. 36). These perspectives bring a common-good point of view to SDG #3, with implications for a healthy and happy life for all and for educational practices.

4.3. Examples from the E=GPS to Address SDG #3

The E=GPS program has implemented diversified initiatives conducive to the optimization of wellbeing, mental health, public happiness, and relational goods. One was the implementation of research projects on organizational compassion, hope, optimism, and Felicitas Publica, with dissemination of data and public action initiatives through scientific and non-scientific publications and media—books, papers, webinars, videos, international solidarity projects, radio and TV shows, social media. Another example was the implementation of dialogic moments inside schools and in diversified communities, along with training programs and webinars for teachers and educators working in Portugal and Brazil. They focused on the topics of positive education, optimism and hope, compassion, public happiness, and social capital. These initiatives had practical outcomes in the school and involved hundreds of educators so far—and are now being prepared to reach thousands. In addition, an initiative on the topic of public happiness involved the majority of the eighteen Schools of the Universidade de Lisboa, whose insights were translated into scientific literature [30].

Among the encounters promoted within the project, we highlight two webinars: (1) a webinar on “Training for Mental Health—Special Edition on Higher Education” and (2) a webinar on “The art of being light: proposals for positive lives in challenging times”. Moreover, we point out the “Happiness, Education and Relational Goods” event, a remote conference which took place on July 2020, within the scope of the international Vatican project “Economy of France” and the School of Civil Happiness in Italy.

The course on Positive Education (mentioned in the Method Section) involved teachers from kindergarten to university levels. Apart from the specific contents on peace and public happiness, the pedagogical processes behind the training were themselves an operationalization of the contents, serving as empirical experience of the coherence between the topics being presented and the educational processes to deliver them. Namely, these were investing in participative and collaborative methods, in the practice of empathy, trust and emotional expression, and in empowering, community, and capacity building. Results of the content analysis of the written individual responses of 84 teachers before and after the training on Positive Education showed an increased relevance attributed to the building of competencies for peace and public happiness (e.g., empathy, compassion, justice and equity, non-violent communication, mutual respect, caring for the common good, investment in positive, inclusive and trusting relationships). Additionally, the impact of the course provoked the development of the implementation in the school context of a larger range of innovative initiatives dedicated to global citizenship and democratic behaviors, which are part of SDG #4.

5. Global Citizenship and Democratic Education: Addressing SDG #4 and Sub-Goal #4.7

In addition to addressing the SDG #3, this paper also focuses on goal #4, and in particular, on its sub goal #4.7. Goal #4 contains 10 specific aims to achieve quality education, defending the idea of lifelong learning for all—and equitable and inclusive education. When facing this broad educational goal, Nikel and Iowe [59] proposed seven conceptual dimensions to describe quality education: effectiveness, efficiency, equity, responsiveness, relevance, reflexivity, and sustainability. These authors [59] presented the concept of excellence in education as a “fabric”, indicating that balancing these seven dimensions, maintaining all of them under pressure, and intertwining them at different systemic levels would elevate the quality of learning. Additionally, in the lifelong learning perspective, learning is about the development of the whole person, indicating a combination of individual and collective social, civic, financial, and political consequences that are required in a particular setting [60]. Sub-goal #4.7 aims to ensure that, by 2030, all leaners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development and global citizenship. This includes, among others, education for sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, support for democracy, and appreciation of cultural diversity. Probably more than any other target, sub-goal #4.7 addresses the humanistic, collective, and moral purposes of education, and explicitly links education to other SDGs, capturing the transformative ambitions of this global agenda.

Growing globalization and the high principles of citizenship helped formulate the Global Citizenship Education (GCE) principles [61]. GCE calls for the organization of curricular activities around the subject and is one of the most strategic spheres of UNESCO. This is the focus of sub-goal #4.7, indispensable to meet the SDG #4. As such, this target 4.7 is somehow inclusive of the previously presented contents. Addressed in its wide-encompassing vision, it can contribute, directly and indirectly, to public happiness and to peace, through the very best of citizenship education.

Hence, global citizenship is especially important for addressing problems on climate change, use of natural resources, food systems, participatory politics, and democracy—problems that have complex scopes, such as deep value divergences, high levels of uncertainty, catastrophic threats, and considerable expenses linked with all kinds of mistakes [62,63].

Democracy implies certain values—such as equality, social justice, freedom, solidarity, communitarian engagement—that treasure harmony upon diversity, provide social cohesion, and safeguard the rights of everyone in our current multicultural societies [64,65]. The endangering of democracies and of a sustainable common future, where conflicts of all kinds put at risk the possibility of peaceful societies, and of ecological diversity and sustainability, is igniting new processes inside the global citizenship education movement, and giving special attention to peace processes [63]. GCE is, therefore, a master piece to promote a future-oriented quality and lifelong education.

If there is no doubt that education can act as a prevailing instrument to develop a more cohesive and equal society, much more work will inevitably be needed in developing strategies to offer the highest quality of education, at the micro, meso, and macro levels [66]. The paybacks of education and training, which tackle on the domains of all the other SDGs at the level of the individual and of society, invite for a far-reaching lifelong learning model, theorized as a relationship between a person’s emotional, social, and behavioral features, the accessibility and structures of education and training sources, and the responsibility of subsidiary governments [66].

Examples from E=GPS and Their Role in Addressing Sub-Goal #4.7

In the context of the E=GPS project, public and citizenship-inclusive actions have been spread to diverse educational structures, including formal schooling from kindergarten to higher education. Programs to defend democracy, citizenship, and sustainability were also applied to other systems (labor organizations, community hubs, religious centers, municipalities, teacher and parent training organizations), where the practices implemented were dedicated to solidarity, ecological sustainability, equality, and social action. Using arts, sports, humanities, and other means of expression allowed for better outcomes. Furthermore, seminars and publications (manuals and chapters) on forms of collaboration and organizational compassion were implemented or are underway [67,68].

From the initiatives of the project, we highlight the conference on “Transformative Education”, co-organized with the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, Ashoka, and Mindfulness in Education. The topic was “Transformative Education”, and had as guest speaker Dr. Thakur Singh Powdyel, former Minister of Education of Bhutan (2008–2013), current President of Royal Thimphu College. The conference was held at the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation in Lisbon on 10 April 2019.

Moreover, we emphasize two webinars. First, a webinar on “Positive education”, an event that opened the “1st Positive Education Meeting.” It was accredited for teacher training and was co-organized in partnership by the Sá de Miranda School of Lisbon, the Optimism Club/Clube do Otimismo, and the UNESCO Chair in Education for Sustainable Global Peace, taking place in November 2020. Second, a webinar on “‘Futurizing’: the role of Positive Education,” a virtual conference delivered within the scope of the “1st Positive Education Meeting” in November 2020. It involved around 300 teachers and school specialists.

After this initiative, the three editions of the 15-hour training course on Positive Education was delivered. The content analysis of the written open-question questionnaires (Appendix A) showed that 82% of the participants created initiatives in their schools that tackled the topics of global citizenship education, from implementing projects involving the more vulnerable part of their communities, to developing projects dedicated to optimizing civic participation from the students. This projects were developed, planned, and implemented by each teacher in his or her classroom or school, with total autonomy. Some of these projects were dedicated to the enhancement of global peace and became informal peace education initiatives. Interestingly, the use of arts (poetry, music, drawings, theater, video, among other media) was one of the means used by the teachers who participated in the Positive Education training. They used it with colleagues and teachers and parents of students to put peace education into practice, as the content analysis of the questionnaires showed (Appendix B).

6. Education for Global Peace: Contributing to the SDG #16

6.1. Peace Education

As a global, cultural, and scientific issue, peace education has been considered a multi-disciplinary academic and ethical arena, whose studies have been used to solve problems in the context of conflict, war, and injustice—through institutions, movements, and individual skills and attitudes [69]. This is the aim of SDG #16.

Peace education has been approached through three main points of view [70]. The first is knowledge-based peace education, understood as the information that can be communicated and trained in the school curriculum. The second, more oriented to character development, defines it as a set of abilities, values, and attitudes that are overtly transmitted as teaching resources in the school context, and can only be addressed imperceptibly and infused in educational settings. The third approach adopts a combined perspective of the two views. Accordingly, peace education is considered a process that encompasses knowledge that can be included in the school curriculum and is simultaneously an instrument that allows the training and development of skills and mindsets in students. It prepares them for interdependence, citizenship, non-violent resolution of conflicts, and global responsibility towards a just and peaceful society [70,71]. This outlook coincides with the UNESCO approach [72], which states that peace education denotes the process of promoting the knowledge, attitudes, and values necessary to prevent conflict and violence, either manifest or structural; to resolve conflicts in a peaceful manner; and to generate surroundings conducive to peaceful living.

Reardon [71] considers that the classroom is a simulated setting where cooperative learning is the foundation for the peace education activities, in particular, where there is a potential to trigger violence or obstacles to peace (e.g., tribal, intercultural, and religious conflicts). This process applies to children, adolescents, and adults alike, and can be addressed at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, intergroup, national, or international levels. Peace education is sometimes coincident with conflict resolution education and defined as a spectrum of procedures that apply communication abilities, and ingenious and analytic thinking to resolve conflict in peaceful manners [73]. Consequently, empathy, compassion, and nonviolent communication have been relevant components of peace education [74].

6.2. Relational and Collaborative Learning: Contributing to Accountable and Inclusive Institutions

Relational learning involves practices that request both students and teachers to enter into a dialogue about the learning processes. This helps deconstruct the power hierarchy within the conventional teaching relationship and opens space for more collaborative experiences [75].

The social constructionist proposal for education focuses on relationships in the process of construction of the world, as opposed to the valorization of a logic in which what counts is the knowledge of the world. According to Gergen [76], we can recognize two predominant forms that are used to explain and justify the different educational practices. The author distinguished between outlooks of knowledge as endogenous (mind-centered) and exogenous (centered in the outside world). They expose a dualism between mind and social environment and overestimate the individual role in the process of knowledge acquisition over the social one. Some attempts to merge these two viewpoints can be found in the path of history (as in the case of the constructivist epistemology of Jean Piaget); however, not much progress emerged [77].

Gergen and Gergen [78] recognized two major elaborations driven by this dualism. The first refers to the pursuit of critical pedagogy that acknowledges political biases and ideological features in educational practices. This is attainable by boosting dialogue around opposed perspectives, coexistent with the appreciation these contexts’ multiple realities. The second is about collaborative learning, funneled by the acknowledgement of the significance of relationships in the consideration of education as a social construction.

Dragona et al. [79] defended four main points for relational learning: (1) knowledge is situated contextually and pragmatically, considering universal and valid knowledge to be impossible without its social and cultural usefulness; (2) knowledge must be approached with critical and appreciative sensitivity, and therefore, its transmission and learning must be part of a process in which practices (action and reflection) are reconciled by meta-reflections and systematizations; (3) knowledge is action, which goes against the traditional models of teaching, transmission, and development of conceptual devices; and (4) education has a relational orientation, where the proposal is to “promote participation; facilitate the joint construction of objectives, means and ways to evaluate what has been done and makes sense to be learned; the strengthening of collective intelligence, creativity and innovation; work in groups, networks and teams; management of tensions and conflicts; and increase of the sustainability of collective efforts” [80] (p. 25).

Relational education directly influences curricula and pedagogical processes. The relational orientation assumes the question of how pedagogical practices can be transformed to become more participatory and collaborative. To make this possible, some circumstances are critical. In addition to the encounter in the school and classroom, it is also desirable to share assets. This, in turn, involves appreciation of reciprocal strengths and capabilities of each social player. It allows for the identification of existing complementarities and the understanding of the interdependence between all social parts. The dynamic balance of powers and exchanges will sanction the integration of visions and practices, and the emergence of collaboration processes around common needs, goals, and interests, generating relationships and educational processes that become inescapably multidimensional and transdisciplinary—without overlooking the differences of complex social life [81].

6.3. Example from the E=GPS Regarding SDG #16

The project was responsible for the implementation of innovative community-based interventions, using participative, dialogic, and positive approaches (namely appreciative inquiry, the World Café methodology, the Jigsaw method, cooperative pedagogical practices, expressive art, sports and meditation exercises, among others). These addressed relevant topics chosen by the communities involved, such as quality of life and sustainability initiatives established by young leaders, the majority of them women. The project has invested in achieving diversity and inclusion, with a focus on intergenerational, inter-ethnic, multinational, and multi-religious events, with special attention to marginalized youth and engaged young leaders. It created spaces and moments for them to work together around positive common aims assisted in the birth of new, peaceful, and egalitarian relationships. In addition, it gave room to the emergence of original community projects, with applications inside and outside of school premises, including diversified stakeholders and disciplines. The interventions also had implications for public policies at the local level, in terms of curricula changes and pedagogical creativity [30].

Among the encounter promoted by the project we highlight the webinar “A close look at Psychology: Interface with Institutions that support marginalized children”. This virtual conference was organized by the Coordination department of the Curricular Units of Psychology at ISCSP-Universidade de Lisboa, with the support of the E=GPS UNESCO Chair. The presenters were Sónia Rodrigues, Ph.D. in psychology and external researcher at the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences at the University of Porto, and Ana Conduto, a psychologist specialized in the psychology of justice. We also emphasize the webinar “Community wellbeing and cultural partner sustainability: based on urban resilience”. This webinar, which took place in July 2020, was delivered within the scope of the E=GPS UNESCO Chair and of the public presentation of the Postgraduate Course in Interdisciplinary Practices and Studies for the Construction of Sustainable Peace at ISCSP and was presented by Professor Graciela Tonon and Professor Maria Laura Zulaica, from the University of Palermo, in Argentina.

In addition, we highlight the 5th Edition of the “Sharing Peace Project”. The chair resumed the meetings after the pandemics, in a virtual format, maintaining the distinctive characteristic of this initiative, where inspiring national and international projects within the scope of peace, citizenship, human rights, wellbeing, mental health, and sustainability are shared. This new series already included the presentation of the following projects: (1) the LisbonProject, an NGO whose mission is to protect and integrate the lives of emigrants and refugees in the city of Lisbon; (2) the Espaço Nativa, an integrative and experimental space that intends to stimulate cooperation based on practices that foster circular economy, consumer awareness, and the promotion of cultural and educational dynamics; and (3) the Nonviolent Communication Lab, an introductory online training course for research and practice, where the principles and theoretical bases of Nonviolent Communication (CNV) are addressed.

In what concerns the Positive Education course here under closer analysis—and as an example of the data gathered that show the possibility of promoting the three different SDGs: #3, #4, and #16—the initiatives created by the teachers involved included a change in pedagogical practices more centered in relational and collaborative learning, as shown in the results of the content analysis to the 84 questionnaires, presented before and after the training. Some of the initiatives and projects imbedded processes and topics explicitly related with peace and positive conflict resolution, while others were more devoted to character development. During the second edition of the course, four of the 36 teachers worked in the same school, involving a socially and economically disadvantaged community, where one student murdered another due to a conflict among gangs. Amidst the pain and suffering, and the extreme violence drawn from this terrible episode, the community, led by these teachers, invested in mechanisms of peace and empathic relationship to transcend the conflicts and create better peaceful-oriented futures for all involved, including the families and communities outside the school. Again, data collected have shown that the training delivered by the E=GPS project was a useful tool to promote competencies, motivations, and practices more consonant with peace, public happiness, and global citizenship education.

7. Summary, Conclusions, and Future Research Agenda

Education is a highly complex concept that is difficult to articulate but needs to be spoken for. In the context of change in the civic space and the world of work—namely the demand for new skills, job disruption, threats to democracy, health risks, hazards to the environment, increased socioeconomic impoverishing, polarization, injustices, and inequalities, among others—education systems have a critical role to play in preparing the citizens of today and of the future [82]. Although there are a number of means, frequently dispersed, of addressing education, both in society at large, and inside the academia, some might contribute better to the SDGs than others. This paper presents approaches to education that can contribute to the objective of achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The models hereby presented are considered fundamental for the realization of SGD #4, but also to support the attainment of other SDGs, namely #3 and #16. The foundation for this strategy is supported by the development of capabilities “that allow young people to become agile, adaptive learners and citizens, equipped to navigate personal, social, academic, economic and environmental challenges” [12] (p. 4).

The Lisbon-based UNESCO project E=GPS was described in this paper and the visions and operationalization of the proposed blend of educational paradigms were illustrated through its examples. It is inspired by a sense of acceleration of the uncertainty, complexity, and fragility of the world. Furthermore, it believes that education is at the heart of transformation. Committed to researching, promoting, and implementing educational models conducive to mental health and wellbeing, public happiness, positive peace, global citizenship, ecological and social sustainability, and relational (formal and informal) education, the project is trying to explore news ways towards more holistic education values and processes. The E=GPS also departed from the belief that psychology has a very relevant role to play as an anchor discipline towards these goals, capable of integrating harmoniously different other scientific arenas, relevant to education, and assist in observing and disseminating rigorous science [31].

Among the listing of multiple initiatives developed and delivered by the E=GPS, the presentation, in more detail, of the results of a qualitative study involving 84 teachers from all school levels, from kindergarten to higher education, contributed to informing how the project is impacting the educational systems.

Results show a change in concept definition of peace and public happiness before and after the 15 hours of training, clearly indicating its impact towards a more profound and knowledgeable approach regarding the topics addressed. Thereafter, this knowledge motivated teachers to create, plan, and implement a set of autonomous and creative initiatives aimed at putting into daily practice the domains under study, from global citizenship to relational education and peaceful conflict resolution in very violent environments. This shows that these approaches can be useful and transformative, both in terms of theory—knowing about the theme from a scientific perspective—and in terms of practice—how we can change pedagogical and relational processes, in order to address the SDGs #3, #4, and #16.

For the future of the project, apart from continuing the activities initiated so far, dedicated to the scientific capacitation of the civil and academic society (namely through action-research, publications and dissemination, training for diplomas and short courses on diversified topics aimed at enhancing global and peace and sustainability, presentations on conferences at the national and international level, network increase, development and support of pedagogical materials for educational purposes, and a more clear investment in active enterprises with international partners, in particular, from Africa and South America), the Chair aims to:

• Spread the Positive Education course to a larger number of teachers;
• Invest in online training on Global Peace (MOOC) with the partnership of the Open University/Universidade Aberta;
• Create an English-speaking onsite training at ISCSP—Universidade de Lisboa, with the support of another UNESCO Chair and the Creators of the Global Peace Index, further developing a new theoretical domain, which is the linkage between peace and positive psychology—to be held at Universidade de Lisboa;
• Develop an index for the assessment of peace at micro and meso levels;
• Gather the Critical Friends Committee to enhance the co-created vision of the project and its future financial supports;
• Capitalize on educational materials and services on positive peace, global citizenship education, and public happiness, always taking into consideration the local and emergent solutions from schools, organizations, and communities;
• Exploit research collaborations to assess the quality of educational materials and interventions;
• Create awards for the services, products, and persons that are clearly salient on the arena of peace education and human rights; and
• Create an online library on Peace Studies.

One of the big difficulties of this Chair so far has been finding financial support. For instance, to maintain the website, the Facebook page, to develop the monthly newsletter, and to apply for grants, we need staff that currently we cannot afford. The future projects, including creating and researching educational material, also need financial support, and this will be the major limitation of this Chair. One of the simplest solutions for this problem has been, precisely, to ask for a fee participation in the Positive Education course and the support of municipalities as partners of this training. Until now, two municipalities have shown interest in financing this course: the municipality of Cascais offered to pay for the training of 100 teachers and the municipality of Alcobaça offered to invest in the training for 600 teachers, including offering a handbook to each teacher with practical ways to implement the contents.

Through this UNESCO project, we come to value particular dimensions considered relevant for future research and practice. The vision upholds, for future research and practice, the education dimensions listed in

Table 1. Education dimensions for future research and practice.

Dimensions for Future Research and Practice	Current Obsolete Models
Interactions, relational goods, and co-construction of knowledge	Colonizing socially and civically anemic curricula, mostly based on technical and academic competencies
Contextually and pragmatically situated knowledge	Educational processes taken as independent of social, economic, and cultural contexts
Collaboration and negotiation of contents	Program imposition and predefinition
Acting towards change	Following a pre-established static stance of reality
Socially, politically, and relationally embedded topics	Disaffected information
Participative building of knowledge, skills, values, virtuousness, and attitudes that empower individually and collectively	Traditional and disengaged models of teaching and transmission
A strengths-based learning system, amplifying the best in people, groups, and communities	Fixing weaknesses and illiteracy of individual persons
Conscientization and systemic action towards peaceful societies and public happiness	Massification of thought, competition, meritocracy, and silencing of collective and global endeavors
Action-research, transformative, and civic research processes	Research void of social impact

:

The ideas presented here argued that the proposed theory of public happiness, particularly concerning relational goods, and that of global peace education and global citizenship education extends and challenges the educational practices and the policy agenda in relation to the normative target of education proposals. These can contribute to better evidence-based policies, new curricula and pedagogical methods in the education realm, and the adoption of context-specific actions with global impact. The paper suggested the need for the unification of contemporary and comprehensive models and targets for education, towards direct and undirect ethical and relevant economic, political, and social change. As indicated, education for public happiness, global peace, and citizenship is well placed to deliver a unique and vital contribution to achieving the 2030 Development Agenda and its related Sustainable Development Goals. To attain these targets, education must forge conditions for tackling crucial trials towards a more vibrant, healthy, and just civilization.