Prefiguring sustainable futures? Young people’s strategies to deal with conflicts about climate-friendly food choices and implications for transformative learning

Abstract

Transformative learning is important for handling climate change. How to include this kind of learning in formal education is, however, still debated. This article takes a bottom-up approach by learning from young people who make climate-friendly food choices to a high degree. Interviews were performed with Swedish adolescents. By focusing on conflicts and coping the aim was to explore if there are elements of prefigurative practice (e.g. to actualize ideals about the future in the here and now) in the young people’s everyday engagement and to discuss how to utilize these to promote transformative learning. The young people experienced, for example, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and structural/practical conflicts. They coped in two overarching ways: strategies to support climate-friendly choices despite conflicts and strategies to deal with less good choices. It is argued that by critically discussing conflicts and different ways of dealing with them transformative learning can be promoted.

Keywords:

• Education for sustainable development
• climate change education
• transformative learning
• food activism
• coping
• prefigurative practice

Introduction

A prominent discourse among many sustainability researchers today is that to be able to handle complex global sustainability problems such as climate change, depleted biodiversity, and future pandemics, we need a profound transformation of society in a more sustainable direction (Boström et al. 2018; Rodríguez Aboytes and Barth 2020). This focus on transformation and system change also has implications for education, where many researchers in education for sustainable development (ESD) emphasize a transformative learning approach where the aim is to help students to develop competencies to be able to contribute to these societal change processes, both in future occupational roles and as citizens (Boström et al. 2018; Rieckman 2012; Wals 2010; Wiek, Withycombe, and Redman 2011). How best to include transformative learning in the formal educational system is still debated, however.

In this article I will take my starting point in educational theories about the importance of grounding education in students’ real-life experiences to increase motivation (see Ardoin and Heimlich 2021; Biesta 2020; Kolb 1984; Sriskandarajah et al. 2010; Tassone et al. 2018). I will apply a bottom-up approach by emphasizing the need to learn from young people who are already active concerning climate change in their everyday life. The results of an interview study focusing on climate-friendly food choices among late adolescents will be presented.

I chose to concentrate on climate-friendly food choices because this is one of the most effective ways in which laypeople in their everyday life can contribute to fighting the climate problem (Gelinder, Hjälmeskog, and Lidar 2020; Nielsen et al. 2021). Earlier research indicates, however, that both laypeople and future and present teachers find it difficult to be critical and to make a connection between consumption of meat and climate change (Banos-González, Esteve-Guirao, and Jaén 2021; Stapleton 2015; Spannring and Grušovnik 2019). These studies show the importance of finding new research-based ways of educating about food choices and associations with the climate-change problem in school.

In the present study the young people’s everyday engagement concerning climate-friendly food choices will be interpreted from the theoretical lens of prefigurative politics/practice, in which change-agents experimentally try to actualize their ideals about the future, in practices in the here and now (Boggs 1977). Prefigurative politics/practice is seen as a third way to influence our society in a more sustainable direction through disrupting habits and creating new social norms, something that goes beyond privatized pro-environmental behavior, but that does not concern direct protest behavior (Raekstad and Gradin 2020). The aim of the study is to explore if there are elements of, or at least potential for, prefigurative practice in the active young people’s everyday engagement. If so, how can these be developed further in transformative learning for a more sustainable future? To be able to answer these questions I will take account of different conflicts that the young people experience and how they deal with these conflicts. Finally, I will argue that an understanding of these aspects of everyday engagement could be important building blocks for transformative learning.

Earlier studies and theoretical framework

Transformative learning

Transformative learning is a theory that focuses on learning as a process of examining, questioning, and changing taken-for-granted perspectives on oneself, social relations, and society (Boström et al. 2018; Mezirow 1978, 2009). It is therefore a perspective that pairs well with the focus in ESD on preparing students for change. Transformative learning is especially valuable when educating about the super-complex sustainability problems because this pedagogical model emphasizes novel ways of approaching problems (see Mälkki and Green 2018). Merely transmitting knowledge and facts to the students are often said to be insufficient to deal with sustainability problems.

Originally transformative learning was primarily about cognition, critical reflection, and “perspective transformation”, at an individual level (Mezirow 1978). This approach was supposed to help people to transform their value systems, which could support life-style changes in a way that is productive both for themselves and for society. Today, however, transformative learning is seen as being about social learning as well (Taylor 1998; Wals 2007, 2010). Transformative social learning in ESD is often about communicative processes where people critically ponder their own values, habits, social practices, and norms, take into account others’ points of views, and co-construct novel perspectives, values, and social practices. The main idea is that in these communication processes a person will be challenged by other ways of looking at sustainability issues, and, hopefully, constructive conflicts can be a starting point for breaking with unsustainable habits and practices and the creation of more sustainable ways of relating to the world (Wals 2007, 2010). This is in line with Mezirow’s (2009) idea that transformative learning often takes departure in a disorienting dilemma, that is, a kind of conflict that we cannot handle with our existing meaning perspectives.

Another development of transformative learning, so-called transgressive learning, goes beyond critical thinking and communication by linking learning processes to practices in everyday life (Barnett 2004; hooks 1994; Leonard 2004). To gain transformative power and critical consciousness, learning about society needs to be anchored not only in social processes but also in everyday actions and practices and the conflicts that can occur when trying to live in a more sustainable way. By acting in boundary-crossing ways, people can examine the inconsistences and conflicts between these material practices and pre-existing beliefs and learn that different more sustainable ways of acting and being are within reach (Concepción and Thorson Eflin 2009; Lotz-Sisitka et al. 2015).

Climate engagement in everyday life as prefigurative politics/practice

If the aim is to anchor transformative learning in practice, it could be valuable to turn to research that focuses on everyday mundane engagement as a possible form of subversive practice, namely prefigurative politics/practice.

Prefigurative politics was first defined by Boggs as being “the embodiment, within the ongoing political practice of a movement, of those forms of social relations, decision-making, culture, and human experience that are the ultimate goal” (Boggs 1977, 101). Today prefigurative politics is seen as something that could be practiced both by organizations/networks and by individuals in everyday life (Raekstad and Gradin 2020).

A keystone of this approach is that critique is not enough to disrupt unsustainable systems and create more sustainable futures; people also need to act and experimentally actualize their preferred futures in the here and now (Amsler 2015; Kagan and Burton 2000; North 2011). Because bigger structural changes are not likely to occur soon, not least if one tries to confront power structures directly, one could instead, or as a complement, aim for societal change through by-passing the status quo by creating alternative social relations, norms, and practices in the local sphere (Raekstad and Gradin 2020).

Prefigurative politics is also related to practice-based hope. With a prefigurative approach actors by disrupting unsustainable norms and routines evokes hope in themselves. However, they also become role models for others, instilling hope in them, and thereby they slowly erode the current unsustainable order, that is, they are prefiguring a more sustainable future (Amsler 2015 North 2011). By doing so, they show that another way of being is possible. In the best case, this could also become a form of transformative/transgressive learning.

Even if a prefigurative politics/practice approach seems to fit well with transformative/transgressive learning, one could argue that there is a need to work hard in educational efforts to promote a dialectical relation between practices and critical consciousness to transform everyday actions into forces for societal change (see for example Ardoin and Heimlich 2021). This is also vital to avoid the pitfalls of individualism and naivety that critics of prefigurative politics have put forward (for a summary see Raekstad and Gradin 2020). I argue that one way to do this is to focus on everyday conflicts and ways of coping.

On the importance of taking account of conflicts in everyday life and of coping efforts

To disrupt and do things differently, which is at the core of both prefigurative politics/practice and transgressive learning, can be painful and could lead to different internal and external conflicts and tensions (Trott 2016). These conflicts could be seen as pointing at often times invisible borders between the possible sustainable society and the current unsustainable society (Cornish et al. 2016; Trott 2016). A concrete example is young people who want to live in accordance with their climate-friendly values. They need to relate to a lot of people that at best say that environmental values are important but who are not ready to live in accordance with them (Haste and Abrahams 2008; Véron 2016).

To be able to relate these conflicts to ESD it could be valuable to turn to Biesta’s educational concept of subjectification. The concept of subjectification includes a strong element of letting encounters with the real world, with its material and social frustrations, be a building block for a formal education that goes beyond the transmission of knowledge and socialization (Biesta 2020). Biesta argues that it is about developing a capacity to transform society, to create something new, by living in the middle-ground between the self and external constraints, a form of constant negotiation between ideals and reality. This implies a process that is very similar to the concepts of border tension in prefigurative practice and to disruption and conflicts in transgressive learning. In formal education, according to Biesta, this implies that teachers should give young people the opportunity to reflect over encounters with “the real” and to let them discover their own subjectiveness in this process (Biesta 2020).

In a sense Biesta’s (2020) description of the subjectification process can be seen as letting the students take part in a form of action research where the practice-based conflicts they are encountering are brought back to the classroom and where teachers encourage them to critically reflect upon them (see David 2002). Or as Ardoin and Heimlich (2021) argue, it is about taking account of young people’s whole “learningscape,” where everyday experiences are integrated into formal educational contexts and the learning that take place there is fed back into everyday life. In this reciprocal process reflection and intentional practice should be encouraged.

In addition, one can argue that taking account of how young people cope with these conflicts between ideals and the real can further promote transformative/transgressive learning. Ojala (2013) has argued that in ESD we need to take account of the broad spectrum of coping with conflicts that young people use. This is vital since different ways of coping could be more or less constructive for an open learning process. Some can potentially hinder transformative learning. In this regard, for example, Spannring and Grušovnik (2019) argue that a kind of denial prevails in education regarding meat consumption. However, there are other ways of coping and they could instead contain elements of prefigurative practice that could potentially be positive for transformative learning.

Aim and research questions

The aim of the empirical study is to explore if there are any elements of, or at least potential for, prefigurative practice in ordinary young people’s everyday engagement around climate-friendly food choices and to discuss these in relation to implementing transformative learning in school. To be able to identify possible prefigurative and transformative aspects the focus will be on late adolescents who are practicing climate-friendly food choices to a relatively high degree compared with others in this age group and the conflicts they experience and how they cope with these. The research questions that guided the interviews and data analysis are as follows: (1) What are the conflicts that the young people experience regarding making climate-friendly food choices? (2) How do they cope with these conflicts? The results will be discussed in relation to theories about prefigurative politics/practice, Biesta’s concept of subjectification, and transformative learning; especially how to implement such an approach in a school context.

Method

Procedure and participants

A group of Swedish senior-high-school students from a couple of medium-sized municipalities in central Sweden were interviewed, the approach was semi-structured interviews (see Drever 1995). An interview guide with themes that aligns with the research questions was developed. The interviews were performed by a research assistant, who was a student in the last semester of a master’s programme in professional psychology, and who is trained in interview techniques and who in addition was instructed by the main author.

The sampling strategy was to contact young people from a list of students, studying the last year of senior high school, who had answered a quantitative questionnaire about food choices¹, and who had accepted to take part in a follow-up interview study. The focus was only on those who had scored higher than the median on an aggregated measure about climate-friendly food choices (for example, avoiding red meat, food that has been transported with flight, and food waste, and choosing food that fits the season, and so on). This does not mean that the participants scored high on all aspects of climate-friendly food choices, just that they in general were relatively good in making these choices. The selection of participants from this group was done by using a combination of strategic sampling, where gender was in focus in the sense that at least a couple of those who identified as girls and as boys should be represented in the study,² and convenience sampling, where those who accepted to take part in the study after being contacted in a random way were the ones who also were interviewed (see Langemar 2008)

The interviewed sample consists of 15 participants, five young men and ten young women. They were in the age range of 17 to 19 years old when the study was conducted. Their main educational focus was natural science for seven of the participants, social science for six of the participants and finally aesthetic subjects (art, music) for two of them. Most of the participants had a Swedish background, only two had a family background from other countries, one of the latter from another Nordic country. The interviews were performed in late spring 2020 and due to Covid-19 they were performed over Zoom. Each participant received two movie tickets as thanks for taking part in the study. The empirical study was approved by the Swedish national ethics committee.

Analysis

The interviews were recorded with a separate recording device and transcribed word by word. Thereafter, a thematic analysis (TA) was performed (Braun and Clarke 2006). This kind of coding is descriptive and is focused on detecting more overarching themes and subthemes, not on doing in-depth analyses of individual life-stories. TA can be used both to analyze data by using theory and to analyze the data in an inductive way. A combination of these approaches was used in the present study. First, every interview record was read through to get a good understanding of the interviews. Thereafter a more structured analysis of the material was started, using the research questions as guiding principles. Themes of interest were marked in all the interview transcripts, and initial thoughts about interpretations were also noted. Thereafter, two separate documents were created with a focus on conflicts and coping. Conflicts were identified by focusing on the theoretical account of conflicts as consisting of incompatible goals, values, views, interests, or needs (Maltén 1998). Ways of coping were identified by utilizing the theoretical account of coping as ways – behavioral, cognitive, or emotional – of trying to deal with conflicts and tensions (see Ojala 2013, 2020). Text excerpts from the individual protocols that fitted these themes were copied and pasted into the separate documents.

Thereafter, each separate document was analyzed in an inductive way for subthemes. To identify the subthemes, Braun and Clarke’s (2006) conception of a theme as consisting of shared meaning united by a concept was kept in mind. Furthermore, identified subthemes should, as far as possible, not overlap from a meaning perspective (Langemar 2008). The subthemes were described by mentioning the unifying concept, that is, the kind of conflict (identified inductively) and by summarizing the main meaning content. Quotations were chosen to illustrate the final subthemes.

Results³

Conflicts

All of the young people mentioned that they make climate-friendly choices because they had been made aware, in school, for example, of the climate crisis and how serious it is. They also had received knowledge about how food choices, such as eating red meat or throwing away food, can contribute to the climate problem⁴. However, the focus on the climate crisis as a motivation for action was often complemented with health reasons and animal-rights issues, and the participants also sometimes referred to old habits in their family, like being taught by their parents, for example, to not throw away food, not for climate reason, but because it is wrong to waste food for global-justice reasons. Two of the young people also mentioned beauty issues, a risk for bad skin, as one additional reason for not eating and drinking milk products too often. These aspects were sometimes mentioned as additional motivators for climate-friendly food choices but were also sometimes mentioned in relation to co-benefits of making climate-friendly food choices. Irrespectively, these aspects supported the climate-friendly food choices made by the interviewees. In addition, social influence was mentioned, with some young people mentioning that they had been inspired by influencers, like Greta Thunberg, to start thinking about climate issues; others mentioned friends or family as role models. However, alongside these motivating factors, all the young persons also experienced difficulties in making these choices, although to a different degree.

The diverse difficulties that the young people experienced in relation to the climate-friendly food choices and that clashed with values, ideals, and the positive aspects just mentioned are referred to below as conflicts. One of the most prominent conflicts mentioned was (1) inter-personal conflicts or social conflicts with parents and peers about life-style choices around food. Many mentioned family conflicts where they did not have full control over their food choices since they still lived in their childhood home, and it foremost was their parents who were responsible for buying and preparing food. Their parents were, however, not always taking climate-friendly food choices seriously. The young people’s views were that this was due to that the parents were thinking too much about money, or because they were too conservative and not open-minded, or because they had a view that it is too late to do anything about the climate crisis, or simply because they were ‘stupid’. Therefore, some of the young people mentioned that if they wanted to eat in a more climate friendly way, they needed to take on more responsibility for cooking the food themselves, which was perceived as bothersome. It created tensions in the family. In addition, some of the young people mentioned that they were tempted by the food that their parents prepared.

Yes, partly because I live at home and my parents do not always think the same as me when it comes to that kind of thing. Parents often think about economic aspects and not about what affects the environment the most. Frida

It is also when you are at someone else’s home and then you are invited to eat it (meat). Then it can be a little hard to say ‘no I do not eat it’…I feel that it is kind of rude. Felicia

Besides being a social conflict, this was also related to socioeconomic factors (see below) to a certain degree; if one could not convince one’s parents to buy alternatives to meat or dairy products, one needed to buy these products oneself. Sometimes these conflicts were related to both parents who, for example, ate a lot of red meat, while in other cases the young people had one parent who supported them in their choices. In some cases, this conflict was related to family traditions that included eating meat for Christmas or some other traditional celebrations. These traditions were seen as especially difficult to deviate from.

Interviewer: Ok. In what situation would you say that it is most difficult to make climate-friendly choices, in general?

Interviewee: I guess if you are, like with… the family and then… when our family are together, it is always kind of culture and tradition that comes first. And in our tradition and food culture it is usually (to eat) meat Rashida

It is obvious that you may miss out on some social aspects… And it is clear that it is also a special thing during the summer, for example now, to sit outside and barbecue with the family (often meat) Sebastian

Another very common social conflict was related to eating with friends who do not care about climate-friendly food choices and ignore, or have forgotten, that the young person cares about these things, for instance, prefers not to eat meat. The conflicts also consisted of a more active resistance from others, most commonly people of their own age, who sometimes said negative things about the young people’s choices. This was related to feeling different, to feel that you do not belong to the group, even to feel ‘strange’ and could also lead to a feeling of loneliness. Often it felt more complicated to go against your friends than your parents, who you dared to question more often⁵.

…yes, I have been that annoying vegetarian in their eyes for quite some time. Alexander

You have gotten a lot of comments. That, and a lot of questions about why I eat the way I do. And… yes it’s a lot like that. I’ve had to answer some questions about why I do as I do. Kirsti

(2) Intra-personal conflicts were also common. The perhaps most prominent of these was related to taste. Sometimes it was really hard to make climate-friendly food choices because meat, dairy products, and especially, exotic fruits were perceived as tasting so good, making it very tempting to choose to eat them, at least sometimes, although they are not considered to be good from a climate perspective. It could also be that one was tempted to eat strawberries in the winter although they are out of season in Sweden. Another rather common example is that one sometimes felt a need to throw away food because one did not like the taste of the school lunch, and this led to a conflict since wasting food is not good for the climate.

…you should perhaps refrain from them, because you should not encourage vegetables or fruits to be flown all over the world… But you want the fruits because they are so tasty. Erik

I usually try to throw away as little as possible. Eat what you have on the plate. Sometimes it does not work, because the thing with food in school is that you do not know exactly what is in it. Sometimes they have it very strangely spiced and… sometimes the food is so bad… and then you have to throw it away. That is stupid. Sara

Another internal conflict that was not as common was related to convenience. It could, for instance, be that a traditional recipe is based on meat and/or dairy products and that it was perceived as bothersome to try to find vegan alternatives. Or that it is sometimes easiest to take a hotdog at the nearest fast-food place instead of searching for a place with better vegetarian or vegan alternatives. These kinds of conflicts could also be related to the circumstance that one knows that there is information about which food choices are climate friendly, but that one thinks it is too bothersome to search for it.

It is obvious that it can feel bothersome, to shop for a new recipe or to cook a meal that takes longer or so…Kirsti

It’s a bit of contemplation again, that you have to think again and again. And sometimes you can’t bear it. Alexander

A final internal conflict, which was not particularly common, was related to hunger. Some of the young persons mentioned that they, especially in the beginning when they started eating vegetarian food felt hungry all the time. But they learned after a while how to eat to feel satisfied. Another aspect related to hunger was that sometimes when one feels very hungry one take too much food at school, or at home, and then got full before the food was eaten and then needed to throw away some food.

If you kind of eat vegetarian, in the beginning I felt at least that I was not really full. Then I probably learned how to set up a meal so that I would get everything I need. Emma

Another common cluster of conflicts was related to (3) structural/practical barriers. Here, the most prominent sub-conflict was the perceived higher economic cost of choosing climate-friendly food, especially food produced in Sweden. Sometimes these were not conflicts that the young people experienced themselves. However, they could imagine that some people do not have enough money and that this is a problem. But mostly this conflict had to do with the fact that in some circumstances the young people had started to buy food themselves but were still students and had a limited amount of money for this purpose.

…and then also that I am still quite young, you may not have such a high income and can’t buy what is best for the environment all the time, even if you want to. Frida

The only, perhaps, negative thing about it is maybe if you are on a tight budget then maybe… locally produced is a bit more expensive. But I have never been in such a situation. Rashida

Besides socio-economic factors, the young people also mentioned other external barriers. They for example claimed that sometimes it was hard to find grocery stores and restaurants with good climate-friendly options. The most common thing mentioned was that so much food contains dairy products, which made it hard to avoid these products totally.

In other words, it is included, the thing is that dairy is included in many things. Alice

…it may be more that in the stores that are near me the majority of all products and goods are imported. So it may be that there is a smaller range of locally produced goods or goods that are organic and produced in Sweden. Rashida

A fourth cluster of conflicts were related to (4) lack of knowledge. The young people felt that they sometimes did not have enough knowledge about what is climate friendly, or not. The interviewees experienced a lack of clear information on for instance packages, especially regarding choosing food that is in season. Surprisingly, the young people did not at all mention conflicts related to more epistemological aspects related to scientific uncertainty, for example, when experts give different advice about what effect a certain food choice has on the climate problem.

Yes, I probably drink quite a lot of milk during training periods when I exercise relatively often… And it is probably also that I do not have the knowledge of what substitutes for milk have and do not have (when it comes to nutrients). Signe

(reasoning about choosing food according to season) I feel that the information about seasons is not very good when I shop. That I have poor control myself of what is in season and what is not. Kirsti

Some of the conflicts that the young people mentioned were related to the complex character of climate change in the sense that they were (5) feeling low outcome-efficacy. The participants were not certain that the climate-friendly choices they made had any real effect on the problem at large. This conflict was more or less unrelated to whether they felt that they can execute climate-friendly food choices in an efficacious manner or not, but rather was a doubt about whether these food choices have any effect on the climate-change problem.

I have mixed and very failing, that is, sometimes very good feelings like that this will lead to change, but also sometimes that it will, it does not matter what is done and like, the US and China will still not change their behaviour … Lucas

Then again, I do not really think that the individual person’s food choice can make such a big difference, considering that it is more about large food chains that buy products from certain companies … Sara

Finally, a few of the young people mentioned (6) health-related conflicts associated with making climate-friendly food choices. It could be that they were afraid they would not get enough nutrients from an alternative diet, for instance, enough iron and vitamin B if they chose a vegan lifestyle. These conflicts were to some degree related to lack of knowledge. They could also be about not being able to eat, or disliking, alternative protein sources like beans and lentils. Or that they felt that they were exercising so much that they needed milk and meat. One person also mentioned that when she felt low and depressed, she sometimes made choices that were not very climate friendly to promote psychological wellbeing.

(meat)… is an important part of my diet to get what I need to be strong and so on, the energy and everything… it is precisely because I can’t eat beans and lentils that I have left it in my diet. Signe

I don’t think it is realistic for me to become vegan… It can be a bigger problem with nutrients … Erik

If, for example, I feel sad or so, then I choose the tastiest thing to cheer me up. Alice

Dealing with conflicts – strategies that support climate-friendly behavior

As is obvious from the conflicts just described, the young people did not always behave in a climate-friendly way, all of them also mentioned that they sometimes choose an alternative that they know is not good for the climate. Therefore, the ways the young people deal with the conflicts are of two kinds: strategies to support climate-friendly food choices despite conflicts, which will be described in this section, and strategies to deal with the fact that they sometimes made less good choices, which will be described thereafter.

One main way in which the young people coped with conflicts was to (1) try to influence others. This way of coping was present in relation to social conflicts and took the form of different ways of trying to influence family and friends to eat in a climate-friendly way. It could be by communicating with others, or telling them what to do, or even nagging about it so that especially parents will understand. It could also be about trying to be a role model in how they act. These ways of attempting to influence others were mentioned by almost every participant, and, in addition to being related to social conflicts, it could also be a way to feel that they could influence others more than they sometimes believed, a way of feeling hope.

If I do it then maybe more people will start doing it… then there will be more and more of us … If more and more people start doing it, even more people will start doing it. If it becomes like, the norm. And if businesses notice that demand is dying out…they will invest in it…So I can still believe in it (climate-friendly food choices). Lucas

(talking about her family) Even if they want meat, I used to, but I’m very much on them that we cannot eat beef all week, we must eat something else as well. And even if there is resistance, I have still gotten it through quite a lot in recent years in the family. Emma

Another way to cope with conflicts was to use different kinds of (2) complex thinking strategies when experiencing a conflict. It could be to see things from a larger perspective. Really trying to visualize how their own actions would influence the climate problem if they made the wrong decision. Or to argue with themselves that even though their behavior does not have a big impact, if at least they do the best that they can, small actions in everyday life at an aggregated level and in the long run could have an effect on the climate problem.

I would say that you remind yourself that…remember what huge emissions there are, you know how much it emits if you take a plane to somewhere in southern Europe. Then you learn to think that if I buy these steaks from Brazil… what a huge transport distance it is, all across the world. Sebastian

I see my small impact on my surroundings and my friends … And I feel like I can influence others, and I feel like I’m part of something bigger as well. That it is what maintains my motivation for it. Alexander

The young people also to a rather large extent used different kinds of (3) moral arguments to support their intentions to behave in a climate-friendly way when encountering different conflicts. It could be to remind themselves about the moral duty or responsibility to choose a more climate-friendly food alternative. The young people also mentioned that they imagined future bad moral feelings of guilt and a bad conscience which made them keep up their climate-friendly behaviour despite difficulties. Finally, one person mentioned something similar to practising the precautionary principle when she claimed that although she is not certain that her behaviors have an effect it still would not hurt do conduct them anyhow.

I feel that I have a responsibility to help with the climate issue and that this problem is still greater than my desire to eat something that is extra tasty. Alice

I do what I can to stop the climate crisis and I make my choices from the perspective, so I can have a clear conscience … Lucas

Another approach when confronting conflicts was to (4) focus on the wider pros and cons of that behavior. Most commonly the young people reminded themselves about the co-benefits of the climate-friendly action, that is, positive aspects that did not relate to climate change. It could be related to health issues, both physical (keeping fit) and psychological (that they felt good making the right choices). It could also sometimes be about reminding themselves of wider negative effects besides climate effects if they chose a less good alternative. For example, animals suffer if they eat meat.

(about choosing fruit, berries, and vegetables that are in season) Next time they’re in season it feels like, yeah, I’ve been missing this taste or, yeah, I…you know, you don’t take things for granted if you choose to set some limits. Rashida

I think that, yes, but it will still feel better if I buy a vegetarian or vegan meal. Lucas

I buy what’s in season because I don’t buy fruit and berries that come from, like, Spain, which strawberries often do. Because they’re genetically manipulated and watery. Sara

It was also very common for the interviewees to use (5) problem-focused coping when encountering conflicts about food choices. This means to confront the problem and try to solve it in different ways. Quite often the young people mentioned that if only they are a bit creative they can solve most problems and transcend conflicts. To come up with a new recipe, for example. Often this strategy also consisted of making different practical compromises in everyday life.

I try not to throw food away and to eat what I have on the plate … I make a conscious choice, a bit, when I take the food too. I can guess what will not taste good, so I try not to take it and take what I think tastes good instead. Amanda

Precisely because we eat a lot of fruit and stuff in the family, and fruit salad. And then there will be a very great emptiness without it. But then we try to fill it with something else, for example, that you have berries from the summer frozen so you can make smoothies. Signe

(6) Previous supporting experiences were also mentioned as something that helped the young people to confront conflicts. They could be habits that made the conflicts less prominent. For example, if their parents had taught the young people not to throw away food for other reasons, like economic factors, this was often not a huge conflict. They just did not throw away food; it would feel strange. Although it was not especially common, it could also be about social norms, that they, for example, reminded themselves what the influencers they followed on the Internet, like Greta Thunberg, would do in the same situation, or they talked about the social norms in their peer group or at home, that were climate friendly in character.

Oh, but it’s a bit that I, but I grew up with it. That you have, yes but as a child, seen how mom and dad have made these choices. So you yourself have followed in their footsteps. Signe

Since I usually shop for the family when I shop like… simpler food products… and my mother has imprinted in me that it is best to buy organic and she will be disappointed if I do not do it. Erik

Finally, some of the young persons also mentioned (7) identity-related strategies that had to do with reminding themselves, when they were about to make a less good food choice, of what kind of person they are, or want to be, a person that cares about the climate. It was important for the young people’s self-image to live up to the ideals they had.

I think it’s awful to see people at school taking food, poking at it and throwing it away. So I feel really bad about seeing that. And do not feel that I want to be like that myself, so I eat what is on my plate. Hugo

I think in general I am a person who likes to do the right thing. And climate-friendly choices are then a way to do the right thing and so I like to do it. Felicia

Strategies to fill the gap between ideals and non-action

All of the interviewees sometimes made a choice that was less climate friendly, and this deviance from ideals was also coped with in different ways. A common way was to (1) postpone actions in time and space. If the conflict concerned being tempted to eat meat when they were together with friends, they could argue, for example, that they can make an exception and instead try to be extra careful not to eat meat at home. Or if the problem was related to sometimes eating meat at home, they argued that they could at least eat vegetarian food in the school lunches, or that when they moved away from home, which would happen soon, they would pursue a stricter vegetarian or vegan lifestyle.

So I usually just think about that I need to eat a little smarter, or make climate-smart choices, the next day. Wilma

Usually, I probably cave and say that, no, but of course you can barbecue a burger tonight. And then I think that I can try to make a better choice when I am at home. Because it is easier to influence the family than it is to influence friends that you don’t have around you all the time. Sebastian

I’ll soon be moving away from home and then I can eat as I want. Sara

Another cluster of strategies concerned (2) putting deviant behaviour in perspective. It could be to relativize their behavior, that is, that if they sometimes made a less perfect choice to think that is not so bad from a larger perspective, for example, compared to a big company’s emissions and so on. The young persons also used a kind of reasoning where they for example allowed themselves to eat dairy products because they were so good at avoiding other things, like eating meat or not throwing away food. The young people also made other practical compromises and negotiations where they had found a medium way to live in a climate-friendly way by, for example, eating meat in about 50% of their meals, or not eating red meat but eating other kinds of meat.

…then it may be that I eat meat anyway. But I try not to, if there is something else, I will gladly take something else. But if there is not… then I take what is there. Wilma

But then maybe I think that, yes but I buy this apple (from another country), but at the same time I avoid eating meat so then I contribute to the environment in that way, but maybe not in the other. Felicia

I should be able to treat myself to an avocado sometimes when people eat beef daily. Hugo

Discussion

In this part of the article, I will discuss the results of the empirical study in relation to earlier research and possibilities for transformative learning through taking account of elements of prefigurative practice in the young people’s narratives.

Relating the results to earlier research

There were some more direct elements of prefigurative practice in the young people’s narratives, and these can be found in the coping strategies that support climate friendly behavior. The perhaps foremost example is when the young people, despite all difficulties, try to be a role model for others. This is done not only through action but also by trying to communicate with the adult world and with friends. To inspire others by living in a way that aligns with one’s ideals is a key element of prefigurative practice (see Raekstad and Gradin 2020). In addition, their moral reasoning and identity related strategies points towards another key elements of prefigurative practice, that is, to live in accordance with one’s ideals whether the context in which one acts is sustainable or not (Amsler 2015; Kagan and Burton 2000; North 2011). Thus, the young people’s climate-friendly food choices are not only about privatized pro-environmental behaviors but also contains elements of prefigurative practice/politics where they try to influence social norms through their actions. A main thought behind theories about prefigurative practice/politics is that direct protests and critical thinking need to be complemented with alternative ways of being and acting for transformation to take place (Raekstad and Gradin 2020).

Another cluster of strategies is the complex thinking patterns that some of the young people used, which sometimes were reminiscent of a sort of dialectical thinking (Basseches 2005). Here, the young people could see both pros and cons with climate-friendly food choices but transcended conflicts with a third element, for example, that “I at least do my best”, or “small actions at an aggregated level will lead to effects on the climate problem” (see Ojala and Rikner 2010). All these more positive ways of dealing with everyday conflicts has also earlier been found among young adults in relation to energy saving (Ojala and Rikner 2010) and recycling (Ojala 2008) and they could be seen as a mature way of negotiating between ideals and reality (see Biesta 2020). They also seem to help the young people keep up their prefigurative practices in everyday life despite difficulties.

It is, however, also obvious from the results that the young people’s engagement does not always include aspects that easily could be interpreted from a prefigurative-politics/practice perspective. The strategies they used to cope with conflicts sometimes instead aligned with an environmental-psychology perspective on internal barriers related to climate-friendly and pro-environmental behaviors (see Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002) such as moral licensing where people are trying to find a balance between good and less good behaviors to reach some degree of comfort, for example, I will do a good dead later so I can ‘sin’ now (Mazar and Zhong 2010; Sachdeva, Iliev, and Medin 2009) and the negative spill-over effect which is about that people often reduce their responsibility to act by claiming that they already do many good things and therefore do not also need to behave pro-environmentally (Stoll-Kleeman, O’Riordan, and Jaeger 2001; Truelove et al. 2014). In environmental psychology these are seen as barriers to change and as something that needs to be eliminated. However, it is vital to remember that this is a group of young people who makes more climate-friendly food choices than young people in general. Therefore, one can ask whether these strategies, because of the rather unsustainable society we live in, are not to a certain degree necessary for them to be able to keep up their engagement. The results indicate that they are not always barriers but necessary negotiations to be able to keep up a comparative high engagement, which is supported by a quantitative study showing that perfectionism in the form of “black-and-white” thinking is detrimental for climate engagement (Ojala and Anniko 2020).

Finally, it is obvious from the young people’s arguments that the conflicts they encounter can be painful, especially the social conflicts. This is hardly surprising, since we are social creatures, and it is very hard to go against the grain and deliberately disrupt habits and norms. In this regard, to come in contact with people who have done this in other contexts can be supportive, as they can be role models for the young persons and as research shows that trust in that others are also doing their part can spark motivation (Ojala 2020). Furthermore, some of the young people focused on co-benefits and positive emotions to cope with the conflicts, a strategy that has support in the psychological literature, since doing so can help people to face difficulties without this becoming detrimental to wellbeing (see Fredrickson 2001).

Implications for transformative learning

Elements of prefigurative practice like those identified in this study may seem innocent, but O’Brien and colleagues claim that prefiguration is in a sense the most ‘dangerous’ form of climate engagement since it not only disrupts but also provides inspiring alternatives to the current societal order and thereby challenges power relations and status quo in a way that goes unnoticed by those who are threatened by alternatives to the current societal order (O’Brien, Selboe, and Hayward 2018). From an educational perspective it is important to think about how to support this kind of engagement. Teachers can make these elements of prefiguration visible to other students in the classroom. Just to get knowledge about the fact that other people use these ways of thinking about conflicts could enthuse young people who do not, and could be a first step towards opening up for transformative learning. When other people are shown that another way of acting and being is possible, cracks of possibilities are opened up and a practice-based hope can be created both among those that act, but also among others who can become inspired (Amsler 2015; Concepción and Thorson Eflin 2009; Lotz-Sisitka et al. 2015; North 2011). However, as Biesta (2020) and Ardoin and Heimlich (2021) argue, for transformative learning to be promoted there is a need for teachers to make these often implicit behaviors explicit through critical discussions in a formal education context.

A sort of dialectical thinking was also used by the young people to deal with conflicts, and in an earlier study with university students this way of thinking has been found to be positively related to maintaining climate-friendly food choices despite difficulties and felt ambivalence (Ojala and Anniko 2020). This could be seen as a form of post-formal thinking that can be enhanced through problem-based learning, where students work with and discuss real-world problems (Wynn, Ray, and Liu 2019; see also Tassone et al. 2018), In addition, an experimental study indicates that dialectical thinking can be promoted by a debate approach where the teachers take an active role in giving structured instructions to the students (Li et al. 2021). Thus, a combination of practice-based learning and critical discussions seems to be best to promote this kind of complex thinking.

Regarding the strategies to fill the gap between ideals and non-action, I argue that there is potential for transformative learning also in these, on the surface, negative ways of coping. They could become a ground for transformative competences through critical discussions in school. When Biesta (2020) argues that a subjectification process could be promoted in school by letting the conflicts that young people encounter in everyday life be a starting point for education for change he also points out that young people need to learn to compromise and negotiate “in a grown-up” way between ideals and reality. In the current context teachers could support young people in this process by lifting these more negative ways of coping, or barriers to change, up to the surface in the classroom and promote critical discussions about them (see Ojala 2013). Sometimes it is perhaps necessary to use strategies like these to keep up engagement, but sometimes they need to be challenged.

The content of the conflicts experienced can also be taken account of in the classroom to promote transformative learning. Trott (2016) and Cornish et al. (2016) argue that everyday border conflicts like these, where sustainability ideals clash with the rather unsustainable society we live in, need to be discussed in a critical way in school (see also Biesta 2020). The conflicts experienced by the young people in this study ranged from intrapersonal to structural/practical conflicts. However, the focus was often very narrow, with an individualized approach to the experienced difficulties. To broaden the perspective, teachers could help students ask critical questions about these conflicts: What can we learn from them about hindrances to a more sustainable society at different levels – micro, meso, and macro? Are all conflicts really individual conflicts, or is it better to also discuss them from a structural perspective, where the responsibility of other actors is also in focus? Some examples from the young people’s narratives are for example social conflicts and conflicts related to convenience and economic factors. Questions that could be discussed are: Who have created the social norms that make you feel bad and different? Why is it hard to get hold of climate friendly food and why is this kind of diet more expensive? Who are the responsible actors? What are these actors doing and not doing, and how can we, old and young, influence them? What does political science say about this? If I want to influence others, and take on a prefigurative approach without destructive conflicts, how can behavioural science help? By asking different questions like these, the conflicts experienced can be turned into educative moments for transformation, where political and ethical issues are discussed (Garrison, Östman, and Håkansson 2015; Kowasch et al. 2021; Lotz-Sisitka et al. 2015).

Finally, the fact that he young people sometimes coped by focusing on co-benefits of making climate-friendly food choices and thereby could sustain their engagement could also be utilized in education. Teachers need to not only focus on “doom-and-gloom” when it comes to climate change, but also have a solution-oriented approach and let the students talk about different positive visions for a sustainable future (Ojala 2015). This focus on positive aspects can help young people who experience conflicts to sustain their engagement, but it could also make young people who are not deeply interested in climate-issues consider becoming active.

Concerning future studies, to further promote the transformative potential, the emotions experienced in relation to the conflicts and the emotion regulation strategies used should also be explored. Emotions can reveal aspects that are not always clearly articulated, for example, issues about global justice (Kowasch et al. 2021; Mälkki and Green 2018; Ojala 2013).

Conclusion

In this study my point of departure was in young people’s everyday climate-friendly food choices, conflicts experienced, and their coping with these. I have argued that by taking account of these conflicts and coping strategies in formal education, prefigurative elements identified can be further strengthened and turned into transformative learning. The theoretical perspective of prefigurative practice/politics complements transformative and transgressive learning by not only focusing on confrontation, but also on constructing alternative ways of being that can be sources for inspiration (Kagan and Burton 2000; North 2011; Raekstad and Gradin 2020). The theoretical perspective of transformative learning can, on the other hand, contribute to helping prefigurative practice scale up by its focus on critical thinking and discussions.

According to theories about prefigurative practice/politics, the future is always undecided and therefore open to change (Amsler 2015). However, habitual ways of being and acting make these aspects invisible to people. The conflicts that we encounter in everyday life when trying to live in a sustainable manner could make us understand this; they open up opportunities to reflect on our unsustainable society in a critical manner (Concepción and Thorson Eflin 2009; Lotz-Sisitka et al. 2015, Trott 2016). However, for these conflicts to become moments for learning for transformation, they need to be made visible and be verbalized, and in this regard teachers in formal education can help young people perceive the connections between these life experiences and macro-processes (Ardoin and Heimlich 2021). Törnberg (2021, 102) argues that “small-scale niches or free social spaces are central to societal transitions by providing a protective space for prefigurative innovations to grow.” Formal education can provide such spaces in which the content of the conflicts encountered can be discussed in a critical manner and be connected to both political questions and ethical questions about responsibility (see Garrison, Östman, and Håkansson 2015; Kowasch et al. 2021; Lotz-Sisitka et al. 2015). To be able to do this I have argued, and the empirical study showed, that it is also important to take into account how young people cope with the conflicts encountered (see Ojala 2013). As shown, there are ways of coping that contain prefigurative elements and complex thinking and that can aid transformative learning and continuing engagement. But there are also ways of coping that need to be lifted to the surface and discussed in a critical manner in order to be turned into potentials for transformative learning.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by The Swedish Research Council Formas under Grant 2017-00880 to the author. Thanks to Anja Riise for conducting the interviews in the empirical study.

Notes on contributors

Maria Ojala

Maria Ojala is an associate professor in psychology at Örebro University and one of the research directors for Center for Environmental and Sustainability Social Science (CESSS), Örebro University. Maria’s main research interest concerns how young people think, feel, act, learn, and communicate about global environmental problem, with a specific focus on climate change.

Notes

1 The questionnaire contained questions about climate friendly food-choices as well as questions about unhealthy/healthy eating patterns, and possible predictors of these behaviors.

2 Not enough people who identified as neither a boy or a girl fitted the criteria for being included in the study.

3 All the names of the participants are made up, and are not the participants’ real names. This is due to anonymity reasons.

4 This is not surprising since the scale they filled out in the questionnaire study, and that was the basis for the selection of participants, was constructed to identify those who make the food choices for climate reasons.

5 In Sweden families are commonly run in a rather democratic way where children are included in decision making.