Conference Program

In contexts marked by polycrisis, democratic erosion, social fragmentation, and growing experiences of political powerlessness and public anger, civic adult education faces a fundamental question: how can learning processes reconnect personal experience with public responsibility and participation? This paper proposes the German concept of “Sehnsucht” as a conceptual and pedagogical resource for democratic praxis in civic adult education. While often translated as longing, Sehnsucht denotes a culturally specific notion within German intellectual and literary traditions that combines desire, absence, and future orientation in a reflective and historically layered way.

Sehnsucht is understood here as an orientation towards what is missing in the present—justice unrealised, belonging insecure, dignity unrecognised, participation restricted. In this sense, it discloses the normative horizon of democracy. It makes visible the distance between lived experience and democratic commitments and identifies fields for reflection and transformation.

Drawing on the pedagogical thought of Paulo Freire, Sehnsucht is framed as a generative starting point for conscientização. Freire locates education in lived experience and develops it through critical dialogue about concrete contradictions. Sehnsucht can function as such a generative theme: it articulates experiences of exclusion, injustice, or unrealised possibility. Within dialogical settings, these articulations become shared inquiries into social conditions and collective responsibilities.

Freire’s concept of amorosidade further grounds this approach. Civic dialogue rests on an ethical commitment to respect, humility, and recognition of the dignity of others. Engaging Sehnsucht pedagogically therefore requires learning environments shaped by reciprocity and care. Dialogue serves the collective naming of reality and the development of socially responsible alternatives.

Illustrations from contemporary adult education practice show how participatory, narrative, and digitally mediated formats open spaces for these processes. Participants situate their own Sehnsucht within historical and socio-political contexts, connecting personal aspiration with civic responsibility. Recurring themes include recognition, justice, ecological responsibility, and meaningful participation. These patterns indicate that Sehnsucht frequently expresses democratic aspiration and an orientation towards shared futures.

Within the framework of Learning for Democracy / Democracy for Learning, this perspective links individual motivation and institutional practice. Sehnsucht can energise civic engagement and support the development of democratic competencies. Its dialogical exploration shapes learning spaces in which democracy is enacted through shared inquiry, reflective disagreement, and responsible participation.

By conceptualising Sehnsucht as democratic praxis, the paper contributes to debates on civic education and democratic resilience. It argues that civic adult education benefits from spaces in which unfulfilled aspirations are articulated, critically examined, and connected to public action. In this way, Sehnsucht operates as a forward-looking force within democratic life.

Background and Rationale

Contemporary adult education and training (AET) is characterized by a fundamental tension between instrumental visions reducing lifelong learning to employability, upskilling and labor market adaptation; and transformative approaches positioning it as a space for democratic empowerment and collective capability building (Milana et al., 2024). This tension has intensified with automation and digitalization, where dominant discourses emphasize “reactive, future-ready skills” – adapting to technological change (WEF, 2025; OECD, 2025a) – while marginalizing “proactive, future-oriented skills” – the capacity to imagine collectively and construct more just futures (Facer, 2021; Barcinas & Fleener, 2023).

Drawing on the capabilities approach (Sen, 1999; Nussbaum, 2011), the transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 2000; Illeris, 2014), and adult education as empowerment (Boyadjieva & Ilieva-Trichkova, 2021), I examine whether AET in Italy develops soft skills as distinctly human capabilities essential for democratic citizenship, or merely as market-demanded competencies.

Research Questions

1) To what extent does AET develop soft skills, and what factors predict this development?

2) Does AET operate differently for different social groups, particularly those inside versus outside labor market logic?

Methods and Data

Analyzing INDACO-Adulti 2022 survey data of INAPP (N=40,477 adults aged 18-64), I construct a soft skills index, synthesizing six competencies: problem-solving, discipline, communication, collaboration, teamwork, and leadership.

Using linear regression models, I estimate the association between the participation in different AET programmes and soft skills development, controlling for sociodemographic variables and perceived training importance. Then, I disaggregate analyses by employment status to examine whether AET operates differently among different social groups.

Key Findings

Three findings address the panel’s democratic renewal concern.

First, perceived importance of training – intrinsic motivation – is the strongest predictor of soft skills development, three times stronger than any training type. This aligns with self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017), suggesting AET works best when perceived as intrinsically valuable – empowerment rather than instrumentalization (Boyadjieva & Ilieva-Trichkova, 2023).

Second, the impact of AET on soft skills development grows systematically as we move away from labor market logic. For employed individuals, the effect is small (β=0.084; p<.001); it doubles for unemployed (β=0.165, p<.001), quadruples for retirees (β=0.304; p<.001), and reaches its maximum for persons unable to work (β=0.580, p<.05) - nearly seven times the effect on employed individual.

Third, this gradient empirically challenges human capital discourse (Becker, 1964) and empirically demonstrates transformative education theory (Mezirow, 2000): when liberated from instrumental pressure, education develops those future-oriented capabilities essential for democratic citizenship.

Theoretical and Policy Implications

Theoretically, these findings operationalize the reactive versus proactive learning distinction and align with the recent OECD (2025b) Framework on “Education for Human Flourishing”, which advocates for a shift from instrumental human capital development to the cultivation of ‘transformative competencies’, essential drivers for both individual flourishing and democratic participation.

From a policy perspective, the results support viewing adult education not merely as individual retraining or employability investment, but as a collective investment in democratic resilience – a universal right across the life course to be evaluated by its impact on democratic participation (Hoggan‑Kloubert & Hoggan, 2025)

Drawing on an analysis of policy reports produced by international organisations, in particular UNESCO and the OECD, this contribution will trace the evolution of the concept of lifelong learning in the context of the transformation of capitalist society. Lifelong education emerged as an idea in the context of the post-World War II struggles for greater democratisation and equality of the education system and of society as a whole and debates about the balance between economic growth and the welfare state. However, lifelong education represented too many challenges to established institutions to gain traction as a policy idea. Under the influence of neoliberal policies, lifelong learning has been largely reduced in scope and co-opted by the neoliberal agenda of efficiency and employability (Elfert, 2018). In the contemporary late capitalist moment, characterised by the commodification of all aspects of life, the broken contract between the state and the citizens, and the exhaustion of the promises of globalisation and neoliberalism (Brown, Lauder, & Ashton, 2010; Beckert, 2020), the meaning of lifelong learning has shifted towards the necessity to acquire “resilience” to keep up with the pace of (working) life characterized by ever greater precarity and uncertainty and technological requirements in an ever-changing and crisis-ridden world (Evans & Reid, 2016; Jameson, 1991). While the discourse of lifelong learning is still ubiquitous (e.g. Schleicher, 2025), the prevailing focus on “skills” and digitisation diminishes the emancipatory and humanistic dimensions of lifelong learning and promotes a fragmented understanding of the human person. By concentrating on measurable performance while marginalising the broader concept of lifelong learning, educational discourse appears to be shifting away from democratic principles.

The aging population – at least in the Italian and Western context – and the digital transition are structurally reshaping the labor market and society as a whole. Intergenerational Learning (IGL) – as a mode of knowledge transfer and exchange between generations[1] – plays a strategic role in the broader framework of age management and lifelong learning by supporting organizational adaptation and promoting more inclusive participation across different generations of workers.
This contribution highlights key findings from the AGEMIL (Age Management Intergenerational Learning; INAPP, 2025) study on the role of IGL practices in organizational contexts within both private enterprises and public administration. The study comprised a desk phase involving a review of national and international scientific literature, the reconstruction of relevant Italian and European public policies, and the analysis of the quantitative surveys “INDACO Enterprises” and “INDACO Public Administration”. The subsequent field phase included interviews with key informants, focus groups (involving senior, junior, and mixed employees, managers, and representatives from Interprofessional Funds and training institutions), as well as case studies of best practices within private companies and public administrations.
The findings indicate that IGL significantly contributes to organizational well-being, particularly when the process adopts a structured approach to knowledge transfer between senior and junior employees (top-down) and vice versa (bottom-up). This exchange fosters a shared language across generations and helps overcome age-related prejudices, reducing conflict. The impacts on organizational well-being are multifaceted, spanning various levels: at the organizational level, knowledge transfer helps retain internal know-how and disseminate corporate values, improving employee retention and the organization’s ability to attract new talent; at the individual level, it boosts the motivation of senior workers, who, feeling recognized and valued, can find new purpose as they approach retirement; finally, from a broader social perspective, intergenerational cooperation strengthens social cohesion and enhances resilience to ongoing societal changes.
A particularly important issue is the measurement and evaluation of the effects of IGL practices, which remains underexplored and inconsistently addressed both in academic research and organizational settings. This is partly due to an emerging evaluative culture in this field and partly to a limited awareness by organizations of the value and effectiveness of IGL practices, often implemented informally and without structure.
Therefore, a paradigm shift is needed, where IGL is no longer seen as a supplementary or spontaneous practice but as part of a broader, structured strategy for age and human resource management, to effectively tackle the ongoing changes in both the labor market and society. To this end, a synergistic and multidisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders (institutions, the educational and academic system, and businesses) is essential to address the needs of a constantly evolving labor market while valuing the contributions of all generations.

The rapid diffusion of artificial intelligence (AI) is profoundly reshaping the relationship between work, learning, and social participation. This transformation generates new opportunities for empowerment, innovation, and organizational improvement, while simultaneously producing risks of skill polarisation and widening inequalities. In this context, understanding how adults use AI and how firms adopt it - within rapidly evolving technological ecosystems- becomes essential for reflecting on the role of lifelong learning as a lever for individual and collective agency, social inclusion, and democratic renewal (Di Rienzo, 2024).

This study offers an integrated reading of the AI modules included in the INAPP (The National Institute for Public Policy Analysis) INDACO‑Enterprises 2025 and INDACO‑Adults 2025 surveys, which provide some of the first systematic evidence on the topic in the Italian context. The analysis explores whether, and under which conditions, the digital transition can strengthen both individual and collective agency, or whether it may instead reinforce asymmetries in decision‑making processes and in access to learning opportunities.

On the individual side, the analysis explores AI‑related practices in personal and professional domains, the motivations behind adoption, participation in dedicated training activities, and the representations individuals construct around these technologies. Findings highlight diverse postures: alongside those who perceive AI as a tool for improving efficiency, supporting learning, and expanding autonomy, there are more cautious or critical attitudes, often related to concerns about employment consequences or the potential loss of control in decision‑making processes.

From the organisational perspective, the focus is placed on the ways AI is introduced into production and organizational processes, the drivers of its adoption, and the role played by training. The adoption of AI, particularly generative AI, often remains at a preliminary stage. More substantial transformative effects emerge primarily where complementary investments in digital infrastructures, data quality, and structured training programmes are in place, confirming evidence in the international literature (Lee et al., 2022; Solaimani et al., 2024). In this regard, training is not only a technical adaptation tool but a strategic arena in which access, understanding, and governance of technological changes are negotiated (Khanfar et al., 2025). Although the two INDACO surveys are methodologically autonomous, their integration makes it possible to observe potential misalignments between individual learning trajectories and organisational strategies, raising questions about the role of workplaces as adult learning environments. Grounded in the broader debate on lifelong learning as democratic infrastructure, the analysis suggests that the quality of the digital transition depends on the capacity to develop not only technical skills but also critical and ethical competences, ensuring inclusive access to learning opportunities. From this perspective, AI is not merely a productive technology but a terrain in which power relations, responsibilities, and participation opportunities are reconfigured. Analysing its intersection with adult learning thus means questioning the conditions for a more equitable, participatory, and democratically sustainable technological transition.

Do adult learners support adult education programmes? Does policy design matter for triggering learners’ support, opposition or indifference towards educational programme? What are the effects of policy design and implementation of adult education programmes on adult learners’ democratic and civic behaviour?

Drawing on historical institutionalism, the policy feedback effects on mass politics can help answering these questions by unveiling how policy design distributes resources and sends interpretative messages to beneficiaries (Bruch et al 2010) and, in turn, how these shape or unmake beneficiaries’ demand for that specific policy (Pierson, 1993; Bussi et al, 2022). Moreover, policy feedback scholars have also investigated the effect of policy design on beneficiaries’ democratic and civic behaviour, such as volunteering (Mettler, 2002).

Right and far-right parties are in power in several European countries and their conception of social policies (Fenger, 2018), including adult education (Grotlüschen et al 2025), might have long lasting effects on how policies are designed and their effect on democratic aspects ranging from adult learners’ opinion towards policies to individual civic engagement (Larsen, 2019). For this reason, this approach is promising because it delves into the policy-politics dynamics and their democratic implications.

Moreover, while policy feedback effects on mass politics dealing with social and educational policies has received attention (Garritzmann & Wehl, 2025; Mettler 2005), there are hardly any studies focusing on adult learners. While this can be due to the fragmented nature across policy areas (Kalenda and Desjardins, 2025), it is argued in this contribution that is possible to develop a new research agenda developing adopting the policy feedback effect on mass politics as theoretical stance.

The paper starts by contextualising policy feedback effects and its mass politics aspect. It secondly delves into the recent literature dealing with social and educational policies. The third part presents how the main concepts linked to the policy feedback effects on mass politics could apply to adult education policy and their beneficiaries as well as how it articulates with existing adult education policy research. The fourth part uses the case of training policies for the unemployed as an example. A final part concludes on the limits and benefits of this approach.