I.
CONTEXT
1. The World Education Forum (Dakar, April 2000)
reaffirmed the vision of the World Declaration on Education
for All (EFA) (Jomtien, Thailand, 1990) that all children,
young people and adults have the human right to benefit
from an education that will meet their basic learning needs
in the best and fullest sense of the term (World Education
Forum, 2000). The Forum collectively committed itself to
attaining the following goals:
(i) expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood
care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and
disadvantaged children.
(ii) ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls,
children in difficult circumstances and those belonging
to ethnic minorities, have access to and complete, free
and compulsory primary education of good quality.
(iii) ensuring that the learning needs of all young people
and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate
learning and life-skills programmes.
(iv) achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult
literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access
to basic and continuing education for all adults.
(v) eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary
education by 2005, and achieving gender equality in education
by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls' full and equal
access to and achievement in basic education of good quality.
(vi) improving all aspects of the quality of education and
ensuring excellence of all so that recognized and measurable
learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy,
numeracy and essential life skills.
2. In addition to the six goals, the Forum identified
a number of particularly critical themes, for example HIV/AIDS,
teachers and quality of education, education in situations
of emergency and crisis, and Information Technology (IT),
as needing immediate attention and action.
3. The Dakar Framework for Action is a collective
commitment. Governments have an obligation to ensure that
EFA goals and targets are reached and sustained (§2,
p. 8). This can most effectively be done through broad-based
partnerships within countries, supported by cooperation
with regional and international agencies and institutions.
The international community is called upon to launch with
immediate effect a global initiative aimed at "formulating
the strategies and mobilizing the resources needed to provide
effective support to national efforts" (§11, p.
9).
4. This paper, which has been developed in an interactive
process with representatives of all EFA partners, interprets
the nature of this initiative and presents their consolidated
understanding of the six options (or elements) outlined
in the Framework:
(a) increasing external finance for education, in particular
basic education;
(b) ensuring greater predictability in the flow of external
assistance;
(c) providing earlier, more extensive and broader debt relief
and/or debt cancellation for poverty reduction, with a strong
commitment to basic education;
Figure
1. Diagrammatic representation of the global initiative
(d) facilitating more effective donor coordination;
(e) strengthening sector-wide approaches;
(f) undertaking more effective and regular monitoring of
progress towards EFA goals and targets, including periodic
assessments.
5.
An important outcome of the consultation process was that
the global initiative must be understood in a wider development,
rather than a narrow, financial sense. While directing itself
towards the Education for All goals and targets, the global
initiative must ensure support for overall development and
poverty alleviation, and contribute to establishing an enabling
environment where needed in the countries in the South.
Support for education rests on political will and must be
understood in a macro financial and political context with
human and institutional capacity-building as critical components.
Political will and financial resources are critical for
the achievement of the EFA goals in the context of wider
development. Other important resources are professional
and technical assistance, knowledge and information, and
communication (Figure 1). The success of the global initiative
depends, amongst others, on the application of general principles
for international development cooperation announced, for
example, in the European Union (EU) code of conduct. This
includes an active dialogue built on trust in the negotiation
between partner countries and partner agencies, on transparency
and accountability as mutually accepted principles, and
on participatory and inclusive planning and implementation
of EFA whose progress must be effectively coordinated and
monitored.
6. With respect to financing, the initiative must
reinforce not only resource mobilization, but also its effective
utilization and management. Increased financial resources
are, thus, expected to be mobilized both through increased
allocations and through efficiency measures in its utilization
and management. The actual mix of the six elements would
vary depending on the particular national context which
may require additional or alternative options as well, for
example the use of IT to improve the delivery of education.
7. The contribution of development partners is complementary
to that of national governments who bear the main responsibility
for advancing and/or achieving the EFA goals. While being
global in scope, the success of the initiative rests particularly
on its capacity to respond to specific country needs as
determined by the complexity of understanding EFA in a wider
development context.
Education
for human development
8. The
EFA goals underline the long-existing and prevailing concerns
of the international community that have been expressed in
numerous declarations and conventions since the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 stipulated free education
for all - a goal reaffirmed in the Convention on the Rights
of the Child in 1989. Two of the EFA goals, universal primary
education by 2015 and elimination of gender disparity in primary
and secondary education by 2005, also form part of the recognized
international development targets that aim at global poverty
reduction through strategies for health and the environment
in addition to those for education. Proposed at the World
Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in 1995, these
targets were agreed by the Development Assistance Committee
(DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) in 1996. They were reaffirmed in the United Nations
Millennium Declaration in 2000 (United Nations, 2000).
9. The EFA goals highlight the downside of globalization,
namely marginalization and exclusion of certain population
groups, countries and regions that have persisted, even grown
more extensive, despite the numerous international declarations
and conventions issued since the Second World War in support
of free education for all, equity, social development and
poverty reduction. According to the Dakar Framework, more
than 113 million children have no access to primary education,
880 million adults are illiterate, gender discrimination continues
to permeate education systems, and the quality of learning
and acquisition of human values and skills fall far short
of the aspirations and needs of individuals and societies
(World Education Forum, 2000). Furthermore, disruptive conditions
related to, for example, persistent civil wars and the HIV/AIDS
pandemic, call for radical rethinking of, or at least a much
wider range of approaches to, the teaching and learning process.
They also highlight the relevance of the Dakar focus themes
and the need to find diversified solutions for countries in
different circumstances, including those in emergency, crisis
or post-conflict situations.
10. The plea of the late 1980s for structural adjustment
with a human face or the need to protect the vulnerable while
promoting growth (Cornia et al., 1987) thus continues to be
valid. Furthermore, there continues to be a strong contrast
between official government support for the international
declarations and their implementation, despite relative consistency
in the thinking on the necessity and benefits of education
for development. Investment in human and social capital are
now widely accepted as means of creating sustainable development,
achieving poverty reduction and reducing inequalities within
and among nations, and of enhancing personal development and
quality of life. The synergy between education and improved
health, higher productivity, innovation, increased political
participation and empowerment is comparatively well established,
although many of the precise mechanisms still have to be more
clearly understood because of differences in outcomes in different
contexts (Srinivasan, 2000). Significantly, education is the
critical force in creating tolerance, respect for diversity
and peaceful understanding - a purpose which has gained even
more significance in light of recent developments on the world
scene.
11. Education is also central to the current, pervasive
emphasis to establish a mutually reinforcing relationship
between macro-economic stability and structural reform on
one hand, and growth and reduction of poverty and inequality
on the other. This is reflected in the outcomes of top-level
meetings, such as those of the G8 countries in Cologne in
1999 and in Genoa in 2001 and of the G7 education ministers
in Tokyo in 2000 at which investment in lifelong learning,
education and skills was placed at the core of the development
of future information-based societies. "Education and
skills are indispensable to achieving economic success, civic
responsibility and social cohesion", as stated in the
1999 Cologne charter. The G8 leaders in Okinawa agreed, according
to their communiqué:
to follow up vigorously the conclusions of the recent Dakar
conference on Education for All by ensuring that additional
resources are made available for basic education.... [And,
in accordance with the Dakar Framework for Action (§10,
p. 9)] reaffirm our commitment that no government seriously
committed to achieving Education for All will be thwarted
in this achievement by lack of resources. ... [Moreover] ...
to strengthen efforts bilaterally and together with international
organizations and private sector donors to achieve the goals
of universal primary education by 2015 and gender equality
in schooling by 2005.
12. The leaders in Okinawa also called on international
financial institutions, in partnership with developing countries,
to focus on education in their poverty reduction strategies
and to provide greater assistance for countries with sound
education strategies. "These strategies should maximise
the potential benefits of IT in this area through distance
learning wherever possible and other effective means,"
the leaders stressed. This theme was underlined again at the
Genoa meeting in 2001 when the G8 countries also reaffirmed
their "commitment to help countries meet the Dakar Framework
for Action goal of universal primary education by 2015"
(Communiqué, §18).
13. Thus, while education's central role in development
efforts is undisputed and backed by high-level political commitment
in the case of Education for All, not all EFA goals seem to
carry the same weight. The wider development targets and millennium
goals supported by the statements of the G8 countries do not
address the expanded basic education concept of the World
Declaration on Education for All (World Conference on Education
for All, 1990) and the focus of the Dakar Framework for Action.
In particular, the development targets for universal primary
education and gender equality neglect the strong emphasis
of the Dakar goals on the quality of education. It is essential
that attention be paid to the expanded concept of basic education
and to all six Dakar goals. These must be interpreted comprehensively
in the context of support for intermediary and higher-level
education in order to achieve holistic development processes.
Understanding
the global initiative
14. The
central focus of this paper is the common understanding
among EFA partners of the principles of and purposes for
the global initiative which resulted from the consultation
process. The understanding has derived from an interpretation
of the six options (or elements) of §11 of the Dakar
Framework for Action set in the context of §10 and
§12 of the Framework. It underlines the magnitude and
complexity in the design and implementation of an initiative
which is to serve home-grown development processes in the
partner countries rather than focus on specific EFA targets
and goals per se.
15. Particularly significant is the fact that the
initiative is not to be understood as a global fund, as
originally announced by the Global Campaign for Education
at the World Education Forum in Dakar in 2000. As interpreted
in this paper, the initiative goes beyond financing of EFA
to interpreting the principles and specific mechanisms for
international cooperation as related to all of the stipulated
six elements and their use in achieving EFA. Providing adequate
financial resources is but one of the strategies.
16. The Global Campaign for Education is now emphasizing
the importance of the initiative as a ledger and mechanism
to monitor fulfilment of commitments both by national governments
and by development partners related to such aspects as the
formulation and implementation of EFA plans, identification
of resource gaps, and brokering and channelling of financing
(Global Campaign, 2001). The World Bank (and UNDP) have
also, in accordance with the Dakar Framework for Action,
linked the global initiative to the fulfilment of the commitment
to fund viable national EFA plans in the context of an overall
poverty reduction framework, specifically the World Bank
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP), the Enhanced Heavily
Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative and the Comprehensive
Development Framework (CDF). According to the Bank (and
UNDP), implementing the initiative would require massive
partnerships based on a division of labour and identification
of tasks in light of the comparative advantage of all partners.
In the view of the Bank (and UNDP), this should rest on
a three-pronged strategy aiming at: (1) reaching consensus
on policy and technical issues recognized as barriers to
development of basic education, especially in HIPC; (2)
undertaking key non-lending activities to help countries
identify gaps, financial or others, hindering the achievement
of EFA; and (3) developing an implementation strategy aimed
at increasing the effectiveness of international assistance
(World Bank, 2000a). The World Bank is currently examining
the practical implications of establishing a global financial
mechanism for EFA.
17. According to these suggestions, the nature of
the global initiative is rather understood as a mechanism
for short-term support, in particular to strengthen incentives
for governments to prepare and implement plans, and for
comprehensive policy dialogue. According to the Bank (and
UNDP), particular attention should be paid to reaching consensus
on the definition of a national plan, criteria for countries
to join the initiative, mobilization of extra financial
resources and ensuring regular, transparent monitoring of
subsequent policy dialogue and action.
18. This focus can be regarded as justifiable in
light of the first, time-bound goal in the Dakar Framework
for Action, namely that countries must produce national
EFA action plans by 2002, either through modification of
existing national education plans in accordance with the
Dakar goals or through development of new ones. As interpreted
in this paper, this would, however, limit the wider development
perspectives that support for education and the Dakar goals
are intended to serve and restrict the understanding of
resources which are here understood as financial, human,
material and non-material in nature (Figure 1). Finally,
while deployment of resources must be strategically targeted,
the principle for the global initiative, as interpreted
here, is to assist in creating the preconditions necessary
for as many countries as possible to join it and to apply
the initiative in accordance with diversified needs.
The financial
challenge of achieving Education for All
19. There
are ongoing efforts in the World Bank, UNESCO and other
organizations to estimate the financial resources needed
to achieve Education for All. They include attempts both
at establishing a global financing goal and at identifying
resource gaps at the country level. In line with the international
development targets, current calculations have focused on
estimating the financial resource gap to meet the goal of
universal primary education by 2015 which has been interpreted
based on either gross (in the case of the World Bank) or
net (in the case of UNESCO) enrolment figures. Because of
the difficulty of measuring qualitative aspects of universal
primary education and of the lack of focus on the other
five EFA goals, the indicative figures remain questionable,
highlighting the difficulty of the concept of a global funding
gap.
20. According to the World Bank, current funding
for education budgets in developing countries originates
predominantly from national governments (97 per cent) while
the international community provides only 3 per cent of
the total, of which 1.5 per cent represents World Bank funding
(World Bank, 2000a). Other calculations indicate that up
to 10 per cent of total funding comes from the international
community. This proportion can be even higher (by some estimated
at 40 per cent) in specific countries. In general, funding
from the international community is considered to play a
critical, catalytic and supportive role.
21. Set in the context of education's critical multi-purpose
role in societal and personal development, the relative
proportion of total education funding in developing countries
provided by the international community is small. The highest
figure estimated to reach UPE by 2015 ($15 billion in addition
to what is currently spent) represents less than 0.3 per
cent of the total GNP of the developing countries, 0.06
per cent of the total GNP of developed countries and 0.05
per cent of the world's GNP (UNESCO, 2001). While enhanced
national resource mobilization, utilization and management
is critical, the international community must comply with
its stated commitment to concerted action that will lead
to increased support for national EFA efforts along the
lines of the Dakar Framework for Action. Such efforts are
particularly important in light of recent international
developments. They must be well integrated with other international
efforts to reduce poverty and global, regional and national
inequalities.
Setting the
six options in context
22. The
six elements for resource mobilization and efficiency measures
identified for the global initiative in the Dakar Framework
(increasing external finance; greater predictability in
the flow of external assistance; earlier, more extensive
and broader debt relief; effective donor coordination; sector-wide
approaches; and monitoring) must be understood and applied
as a function of the different institutional and structural
contexts and constraints at the national level that would
determine the specific approaches and strategies adopted
by development partners and national governments. In this
respect, macro-economic and sectoral reform must be linked
in order to ensure a supportive environment that would enable
the education system to function efficiently and effectively
as a development tool. Reform efforts must include policy
reform to enhance locally generated resources for education
and other development purposes through, for example, more
effective fiscal instruments, appropriate taxation and taxation
incentives, enhanced private sector contributions and budgetary
re-allocations, and the attraction of additional private
international capital flows, concessional resources and
improved measures for debt relief. All resources and xpenditures
must be treated within a common budgetary framework. Simultaneous
policy reform of the education sector must aim at cost-shifting
and cost-sharing. Cost-sharing should be undertaken without
adverse effects for the poor and without enhancing gender,
rural/urban, regional and other inequalities, thus implying
at the same time the elimination of direct and indirect
user fees at the basic level. The efficiency and effectiveness
of the teaching-learning processes must be heightened through
locally adapted solutions, including the use of new information
technologies. This also includes the adoption of sector-wide
approaches to educational development and improving aid
conditionalities.
23. Support for EFA must form part of other education
sector support and of the core elements of a government's
budget. EFA must be linked within sector frameworks with
poverty reduction and development strategies. This means
coherence among national Education for All action plans,
education sector plans, development strategies and other
policy frameworks, such as the Common Country Assessments
(CCA), the United Nations Development Assistance Framework
(UNDAF), CDF, PRSPs and the HIPC Initiative.
24. International and national resource mobilization
must, thus, be complementary and well targeted in pursuit
of holistic national development processes. Such mobilization
depends on high-level political commitment of both national
governments and international agencies. Global and national
redistribution of resources through, for example, improved
trade conditions or budgetary re-allocations might be particularly
instrumental in filling the estimated funding gap both in
the short and the long term (OECD/DAC, 1996, 1998, 1999,
2000; Watkins, 2000.; Kö?hler and Wolfensohn, 5 September
2000). In the current context of increased international
security measures, it will be particularly important not
only to protect education and wider social sector spending,
but to invest at a level that can guarantee their critical
functions for poverty reduction, sustainable development
and international peace and solidarity. Further development
and implementation of the global initiative must, therefore,
continue to involve all EFA partners and must form part
of the thinking on financing and development in organizations,
such as the Bretton Woods institutions, OECD and the G8.
Trends in
international development assistance during the 1990s
25. The
need for innovative thinking in resource mobilization is
partly related to the discouraging trend in Official Development
Assistance (ODA) and other financial flows during the 1990s.
Total net resource flows to aid recipient countries of which
ODA forms a part, more than doubled during 1991-96 (from
$138 billion to $354 billion), but declined severely during
1996-98 because of the Asian financial crisis and have only
somewhat recovered in recent years (estimated at $248 billion
in 1999) (OECD/DAC, 2001). The proportional share of Official
Development Finance (ODF) (which includes ODA) dropped from
two-thirds to one third of the total during 1991-99, private
flows having gained comparative importance with a peak of
78% of the total in 1996 when ODF was at its lowest.
26. As a percentage of the combined GNP of OECD/DAC
member countries, ODA has fallen by more than one-fifth
in constant dollar terms, from 0.33% in 1992 to its lowest
level of 0.22% in 1997 with some slight recovery to 0.24%
in 1999. Real net ODA disbursements (in constant 1998 prices)
fell from $60,421 million in 1992 to $48,324 million in
1997, then increased to $55,343 in 1999 (Figure 2). Four
member countries (Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden)
were joined in 2000 by Luxemburg, according to provisional
figures, in having fulfilled the United Nations target of
allocating 0.7 per cent or more of GNP for international
development assistance (Figure 3). The largest four economies,
France, Germany, Japan and United States, together with
Canada and Italy, have had the greatest reductions in their
assistance during the 1990s, although the trend for Japan
has been positive since 1998 because of special contributions
in light of the Asian financial crisis. By contrast, the
non-G7 group have allocated increased shares throughout
the 1990s and additional, smaller countries have joined
in this support.
27. Aid allocations have declined in all regions
except for Europe and Central Asia, and East Asia and the
Pacific during the 1990s. The trend for the least developed
countries has been downward in recent years, sub-Saharan
Africa having witnessed the sharpest decline, by roughly
one-third. Some of the major aid providers are responsible
for some of the largest reductions.
28. The ODA proportion of total net resource flows
was halved during 1991-98 (from 41.4% to an estimated 20.7%)
with respect to both bilateral and multilateral funds. Of
total multilateral real net disbursements, non-concessional
funding gained importance over concessional funding during
the 1990s (in 1999 $13,611 million compared to $13,268 million
in constant 1998 prices). EC and the International Development
Association (IDA) provided roughly one-third of concessional
real flows in 1999 ($5,073 million and $4,600 million, respectively),
with the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) ($5,868 million),
IBRD ($3,746 million) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB)
($2,542 million) being the main providers of non-concessional
real flows (OECD/DAC, 2001).
29. It is noteworthy that education seems to have
suffered relatively less within this overall declining ODA
trend. This must be judged, however, against rather low
allocations in individual countries' overall development
assistance for education, generally, and for basic education,
specifically (Figures 4a, 4b and 5). Of total DAC bilateral
allocations, education seems to have maintained its proportional
share constituting roughly 11% in both 1989 and 1999,
Figure 2. Real and
current net flows of Official Development Assistance, 1966-1999
whereas multilateral
allocations increased from 4.6 to 7.6% in the same years
(Buchert, 1995; OECD/DAC, 2000, 2001).
30. The absolute value of bilateral commitments to
education was largely unchanged in 1999 compared to 1990
(roughly $3,980 million in constant 1998 prices), having
experienced a high of $4,341 million in 1994. Multilateral
funding increased by only roughly $300 million during 1990-97
($2,789 million in 1997 in constant 1997 prices) (OECD/DAC,
2001; UNESCO, 2000b, p. 120). Bilateral support for basic
education amounted to only $703 million, on average, in
1997-98 (OECD/DAC, 2001, p. 154), constituting 1.2% of total
bilateral ODA commitments.3 Of multilateral financial commitments
(ODF), basic education constituted 4.8% in 1999 (OECD/DAC,
2001, 19).4
31. The EFA partners are, therefore, faced with several
challenges. First, they should radically increase support
for basic education and for overall international development
assistance. This has become even more crucial in the currently
difficult international security situation. Increased financing
must be ccompanied by greater predictability in the flow
of external assistance and maximum reliance on all available
and possible new funding sources, including debt relief
and/or debt cancellation for basic education. Second, they
must ensure that increased financial flows, ODA as well
as private financing, act as a catalyst for national resource
mobilization and sustainable development with due attention
to the critical role of basic education. This would require
targeting of resources and setting conditionalities in view
of differential needs in specific regions and countries.
Third, they should strengthen policy coherence and coordination
of EFA efforts nationally and internationally, adopt sector-wide
approaches and strengthen partnerships with all EFA actors.
This will ensure that the various international initiatives
related to the international development targets promote
the Dakar EFA goals and basic education. Fourth, they must
hold national governments and the international community
to their commitment to EFA through careful monitoring of
the progress towards the EFA goals and targets. This will
include monitoring of financing for (basic) education as
well as identification of constraints and opportunities
for planning, formulation and implementation of national
EFA goals and targets.
|
