I've reviewing what I think has evolved into a rather good paper for EER. In it, the author uses (following Stephen Sterling's lead) the phrase sustainability education as a "generic and inclusive term that can accommodate different interpretations". Well, I wonder about that. It has, of course, the considerable merit of not involving prepositions (no: for / in / about / by / under / etc) and therefore affords less scope for tendentious pedants everywhere to find a determinism where none may exist. However, it does not, I think, absolve the user from explaining what they mean – a discipline we all might benefit from.
But why stop there? At the end of the day, sustainability education is still a mouthful: a whole 10 syllables and 23 characters. Think of how much ink, time and finger strain could be saved if it were abbreviated. So, what about SusEd – as green a term as you'd wish to find – and in these austere times this could be a major contribution to getting the world out of its economic difficulties. Maybe ...
Sadly, but for the neologistic record, 'sused' is already a Slovak word for neighbour.