From Literacy to Competence: Systematic Review Maps Sustainability Education’s Conceptual Shift

A systematic review of sustainability education research has traced how the field’s central concept has evolved from “sustainability literacy” toward “sustainability competence,” while exposing persistent gaps in how the constructs are measured and taught. Following the PRISMA 2020 reporting guidelines, the researchers searched the Scopus database for publications from 2016 to 2026, identifying 385 records. From these, 30 articles were selected for in-depth analysis using thematic synthesis combined with bibliometric techniques. The review was published as an open-access article in Discover Sustainability.

The analysis revealed three distinct phases of conceptual development. A foundational phase ran from 2017 to 2019, followed by a consolidation phase between 2020 and 2022, and a diversification phase from 2023 to 2026. Across these phases, sustainability literacy and sustainability competency emerged not as competing ideas but as complementary constructs, suggesting the field has moved beyond an either-or debate about terminology. This staged trajectory indicates that conceptual work in sustainability education has become increasingly robust over the review period, even as the authors caution that methodological consistency and contextual diversity remain limited.

When it came to operational frameworks, the review found striking fragmentation. Only five of the analyzed studies, or 16.7 percent, explicitly employed the Wiek–Brundiers framework, a widely cited model in sustainability competence research. The remaining 83.3 percent developed or adapted diverse contextual frameworks of their own. Despite this heterogeneity, cognitive, affective, and behavioral domains surfaced as the most consistent dimensions across the literature, providing a common thread through otherwise varied conceptualizations.

Assessment practices showed an equally uneven picture. Among the 21 studies that contributed to the review’s empirical assessment typology, self-report was the most frequently represented approach, accounting for 13 studies, or 61.9 percent. Critically, the review found that cross-cultural validation was not reported for any of the instruments identified in those studies. This absence of validation evidence raises questions about whether existing measurement tools can meaningfully compare sustainability learning outcomes across different cultural and educational contexts.

On the pedagogical side, the reviewed studies pointed to real-world, practice-based, and arts-based learning as promising strategies for building sustainability competence. Notably, no studies involving immersive technologies were identified within the reviewed research. The authors urge caution in interpreting that absence, however, because technology-specific terms were not explicitly included in the search strategy, meaning relevant work could exist outside the captured literature.

Perhaps the review’s most consequential finding is a geographic and institutional blind spot. The authors identified an evidence gap at the intersection of vocational education, secondary education, and developing-country contexts, where no empirical studies evaluating pedagogical interventions were found. This means that learners in vocational and secondary settings across the Global South currently lack evidence on which teaching approaches actually work for sustainability competence development.

The review’s conclusions carry direct implications for international education policy, particularly the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal target 4.7, which calls for education that promotes sustainable development. The authors recommend that future research prioritize instrument harmonization, cross-cultural validation of assessment tools, and greater empirical attention to the Global South. Without such work, the field’s conceptual maturity risks outpacing its ability to measure and demonstrate learning outcomes reliably.

For researchers, the findings suggest that the proliferation of bespoke frameworks, while reflecting rich contextual adaptation, has come at the cost of comparability. The dominance of self-report measures, combined with the lack of cross-cultural validation, limits the strength of conclusions that can be drawn from the existing evidence base. As the field enters what the review characterizes as a diversification phase, the challenge shifts from defining sustainability competence to building shared instruments and testing pedagogies in the educational settings where evidence is currently thinnest.

Subject of Research: Conceptual evolution, assessment and pedagogy of sustainability literacy and competence in education

Article Title: Sustainability literacy and sustainability competence in education a systematic review of conceptual differentiation assessment and pedagogical approaches

Article References: Pratama, H., Sarwanto, S., Harlita, H., & Maduretno, T. W. (2026). Sustainability literacy and sustainability competence in education a systematic review of conceptual differentiation assessment and pedagogical approaches. Discover Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-026-05102-8

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s43621-026-05102-8

Keywords: sustainability literacy, sustainability competence, systematic review, education for sustainable development, PRISMA, assessment instruments, self-report measures, Wiek-Brundiers framework, SDG 4.7, Global South, pedagogy, thematic synthesis