International policy influencers and their agendas on global citizenship: A critical analysis of OECD and UNESCO discourses

Francisca Costa, Pedro Ponte E Sousa

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review


Several international institutions, acting as policy influencers, are promoting, disseminating and implementing global citizenship. Its integration in international networks or transnational governance structures to solve systemic problems through technocratic and so-called ‘apolitical’ solutions and policies is focused on global citizenship education, despite its contested nature as a concept, especially in the age of capitalism. In this chapter, we examine international guidelines and recommendations regarding the promotion of global citizenship skills and competences, primarily from the OECD and, second, from UNESCO. We analyse the discourse and practice of these organisations by considering that global citizenship, under a pedagogical lens, fosters people’s interests and motivation to participate in and contribute to a wider, shared, international community through their acquisition of adaptable and critical skills and competences preparing them for the planetary challenges and responsibilities of the future, as critical, empowered, participatory and responsible global citizens. In short, we provide a critical overview highlighting the main features of these organisations’ use of the concept of global citizenship, in order, through a critical approach, to grasp better how and why these discourses are deployed.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Global Citizenship Nexus
Subtitle of host publicationCritical Studies
EditorsDebra Chapman, Tania Ruiz-Chapman, Peter Eglin
Number of pages20
ISBN (Electronic)9781000062786
ISBN (Print)9780367335816
Publication statusPublished - 8 Apr 2020

Publication series

NameRoutledge Advances in Sociology


Dive into the research topics of 'International policy influencers and their agendas on global citizenship: A critical analysis of OECD and UNESCO discourses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this