Broadly speaking, lifelong learning is rooted in two main traditions - one concerned with human resource development for the economy; the other concerned with the promotion of democracy and citizenship in the interests of the majority. (Gustavsson, 1997) There has been an explosion of interest in lifelong learning in the North as part of their drive to be globally competitive. In the South, governments and funding agencies have been a little more reticent. The dominant discourse of lifelong learning is mainly concerned with the economy at the high end. In addition to its economistic orientation, there is a growing critique amongst certain academics of the use of lifelong learning for social control in places like the UK. (Crowther, 2004, p.125) Crowther argues that lifelong learning as currently practised is negative as it “diminishes the public sphere, undermines educational activity, introduces new mechanisms of self-surveillance and reinforces the view that failure to succeed is a personal responsibility”.

Some others located in the South (Torres, 2003; Walters, 2001), argue for the importance of a lifelong learning framework and argue against the notion that lifelong learning is good for the North while basic education is promoted in the South. They argue that all learning is inextricably linked and the strong differentiation of children’s and adult’s learning is unhelpful. A lifelong learning attitude is required across all ages for people’s ongoing engagement in personal, political, cultural or economic development.

Unlike Aitchison, who is inclined to interpret lifelong learning and its related concepts as working only in the interests of global capitalism, evidence shows that they are contested terms and must continually be given contextual meaning. Lifelong learning is not automatically a `good thing` or a `bad thing`. While it is mainly used in relation to increasing the efficiency of the marketplace, there is value in challenging this hegemony and supporting the notion that its aim is to enhance active citizenship which:
connects individuals and groups to the structures of social, political and economic activity in both local and global contexts, and emphasises women and men as agents of their own history in all aspects of their lives. (UIE, 1998)
Lifelong learning within this understanding assumes the need for major pedagogical, organizational and social changes to address equity, redress and economic concerns. Coffield (2000) argues that lifelong learning is going through three overlapping stages, namely those of `romance`, `evidence` and `implementation`. As he says, many of the materials on lifelong learning are almost theological in their zeal and remain at the romantic levels, claiming learning as a panacea. The implementation of lifelong learning within a more holistic framework is the challenge.”
 

(1) Extract from a longer article by Shirley Walters: “Adult Learning within Lifelong Learning: A different lens, a different light”, Journal of Education, No 39, 2006, University of Kwazulu Natal, South Africa http://www.ukzn.ac.za/joe/JoEPDFs/JoE%2039%20walters.pdf