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.
|
