|
|
 |
| World Education Forum > Strategy sessions > | |
|
 |
|
 |
World
Education Forum
Dakar, Senegal 26-28 April 2000 |
|
| Mobilizing
new resources for basic education |
|
Issues
Paper
|
|
Original
: English
|
|
| External
aid |
|
| To
achieve the objective of providing quality primary education
for all by the year 2015, new resources and better use of existing
resources will be necessary. Although some donors have considerably
increased their aid for basic education, none can satisfy the
needs. Indeed, as a proportion of total aid, that for education
has fallen or remained constant since the mid-1980s. Globally,
basic education represents less than 1% of total bilateral aid
and 5% of the funds provided by the World Bank. Of these amounts,
only 12% is allocated to the basic levels and only one-third
of aid for education goes to countries where fewer than half
of all children are enrolled in primary school. |
|
| World
Bank loans for education in sub-Saharan Africa have amounted
to no more than 13% of expenditure on education in the last
three years. Further decreases are expected in the next three
years, due to the reduced availability of concessionary loans
for education. Among the aid donors of the DAC1 which largely
finance education, few devote sufficient funds to basic education,
thus considerably weakening the impact of their educational
aid on poverty reduction. Only a handful of aid donors show
good quantitative results in terms of the prioritization of
basic education and the targeting of the most marginalized countries.
In sum, donors give only a quarter of what they should be giving
under the terms of the 20:20 initiative to achieve the objective
of free primary education for all by the year 2015 2 (see attached
table). |
|
|
Moreover, external aid often has conditions attached to it which
affect its impact. It has often been said that Structural Adjustment
Programmes (SAPs) have had a negative impact on the capacity
of governments to provide free, quality education. The education
sector represents a large share of public expenditure, and suffers
badly from the cuts required under SAPs. Other types of attached
conditions include tied aid, under which a proportion of the
aid returns to the donor country through consultant contracts
or the supply of materials. It has been said that sectoral approaches
to educational aid can help to reduce wastage in the sector,
by enabling governments to plan and control expenditure more
effectively. In the absence of a sectoral approach, the governments
of the South are obliged to devote their resources to complying
with the conditions imposed by aid donors in terms of reporting,
consulancy assignments, etc. |
|
|
Which new partnerships can be developed today to optimize
aid to the education sector, and ensure that such aid does
not result in increased dependence on the part of the countries
of the South?
|
|
| The
contribution of the community |
|
|
In education, governments still play a major role - and this
will certainly continue to be the case - particularly in the
financing of primary and secondary education. But other entities
are also involved, and this phenomenon will no doubt continue
to grow in the years to come. |
|
|
UNICEF's report The State of the World's Children, 1999, concentrated
on education. One of the themes of this report concerned partnerships
and the changing role of the State. The report notes that "the
formation of partnerships has become a central concept in planning
and managing education, especially in situations where significant
numbers of children are deprived of education. The State retains
responsibility for setting national objectives, mobilizing resources
and maintaining educational standards, while NGOs, community
groups, religious bodies and commercial enterprises can all
contribute, making education a more vital part of the life of
the whole community". The publication adds that "instead of
acting as an omnipotent central authority, States are finding
that partnerships with multiple sectors of society offer a greater
chance of achieving Education For All, and many are passing
power to lower levels of the system to improve efficiency and
responsiveness". |
|
|
As governments look for ways of decentralizing responsibilities,
increasing equality of educational opportunities and further
mobilizing resources, they need strong, innovative allies. The
Amman Forum (1996) noted that the wider and the more active
those partnerships have been, the better the results that have
been achieved since Jomtien (1990). The main partner in this
context remains the community, which is simultaneously the host
the and beneficiary of schools. Scenarios vary according to
context and country. Contributions by the community can cover
the total cost of the education system, or may simply take the
form of modest school fees. |
|
|
The question of the financial contribution of the community
has given rise to controversy: Article 26 of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (1948) stipulates that "Education shall be free,
at least in the elementary and fundamental stages". This same
principle is found in other standard-setting texts adopted since
then by the international community. In the light of those texts,
the reality of the poorest countries requires that these costs
be shared to a certain extent. Thus, the Jomtien Declaration
(1990) advocates that we "mobilize existing and new financial
and human resources, public, private and voluntary", although
it does not include any clause concerning provision free of
charge. The logic followed here is that cost-sharing through
the charging of tuition fees can generate the necessary resources
and, by means of a system of redistribution for the benefit
of the most impoverished, can guarantee better social justice.
In the absence of such mechanisms of social justice, the principle
of cost-sharing through tuition fees nevertheless increases
the marginalization of the poorest populations. According to
certain analyses, community contributions are perceived as a
particular form of privatisation of the education sector, and
this carries the risk of marginalizing the role of the State
and turning the education service into a commercial product
governed by the capacity of its consumers to pay the price demanded
for it. |
|
|
One of the main arguments in favour of community contributions
is that the education systems of countries where community
contributions cover a major part of the operating budget make
it possible to contemplate partnerships with the educational
authorities in a new light, and lead communities to become
more fully involved in the system. Conversely, there are those
who point out that, at present, communities do not usually
have much control over the education system, even though they
contribute to it in a major way. In a number of governmental
programmes, community financing is considered to be an alternative
to direct taxation, and communities have no more control over
their funds than they would have over tax revenues. Also,
communities may have only a limited role in programmes organized
by donors. In reality, as Wright and Govinda observe (1994),
"It is not always certain that partnerships with communities
are designed to encourage real participation and fair monitoring,
rather than simply to induce the communities to pay for programmes
drawn up by others".
|
|
|
|
Innovative, constructive partnership initiatives have nevertheless
come into being in recent years, offering different scenarios
in terms of sharing of responsibilities, and blurring the terminological
distinction between the "formal system" and "informal system
" categories. These partnership initiatives have also highlighted
the non-financial role of community participation, in that they
have drawn on local knowledge in the context of teaching and
in that certain tasks inherent in the system (management, monitoring
etc.) have been delegated to communities. These contributions,
although difficult to quantify, represent in certain cases a
not insignificant share of the operation of education systems.
|
|
| This strategy
session will address the following issues: |
|
How,
in the twenty-first century, can the delicate balance be
achieved between the necessary central role of the State
and the rights of communities to be more than mere contributors,
when on the one hand, the State must continue to be the
guarantor of national unity and of the values of society
which education is to convey, and on the other, populations
have the right to demand to participate in devising an education
system adapted to their needs?
What
can external partners do to help countries in their search
for this balance?
|
|
|
 |