Global governance of education in an unequal world:

agendas, programs and prospects

Antoni Verger Universiteit van Amsterdam

Structure of the session

[1.00-1.45]• Global Governance of Education

• The role of IOs in education (main agendas and programmes

• Impact of global governance in state power

//////////// break /////////////

[2.00-2.45]• Case study: education in the WTO/GATS

Objectives

• Define “global governance of education”• Explain the role of the international

organizations in this new scenario• Present the main IOs in education, their

agendas and what do they do to promote their agendas

• Explain how the role of the state is being altered in this scenario

3. GLOBAL GOVERNANCE:• New more complex form of multilayered governance. Formal

international institutions through which the rules and norms governing the world are made and sustained

• Role of the state: coordinator, but also ‘coordinated’ by external actors• Second de-nationalization shift: from national to multi-level governing

1. GOVERNMENT:

Traditional conception of steering as hierarchical sate regulation, provision and control of key activities within the borders of the nation state

Role of the State: dominant role, government is free to act to pursuit the common interest (or to achieve its political program)

2. GOVERNANCE:

-Government through networks of coordination between stakeholders

-Role of the state: coordinator and activator

-First de-nationalization shift: privatization of some activities

From government to governance: new actors enter the scene

[GOVERNMENT] State

[GLOBAL GOVERNANCE]

Local Governments

Local NGOs and unions

UNESCO

Year/members 1945 (192 members, Paris)

Functions / Power source

- Forum debate- Declarations, recommendations, conventions- Small programmes of intervention- Technical assistance

Conception education (problems)

Human Right (focus on Equity, Quality and Cultural diversity)

World Bank

Year/members 1947 ( 186 members; Washington DC)Functions / Power source

- Lending money (2 bilions per year in Educ)- Technical aassistance

Programmes - Privatization / PPPs- Decentralization / School based

management- Diversification of funding

Conception Ed. (problems)

Human Capital (quality, efficiency)

Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development

Year/members 1961 (North-American & European countries, Japan and Turkey; headquarters: Paris)

Functions / Power source

- Debate forum- Think-tank on education policy- Evaluation (PISA)

Conception Ed.(problems)

-Competitiveness / Human Capital(financing, quality, link educ to growth)

Programme for International Student Assessment

Year/members

2000 Non-state actors (headquarters: Johanesburg)

Conception Education (problems)

- Human Right (EFA agenda and beyond)

Functions / power functions

- Advocacy - Lobbying (“School Report”)- Pluri-scalar strategy- Use of celebreties

Complex multilateralism: direct participation of civil society in IOs

Formal members Unions and employers association in ILO

Dialog INGOs and unions in the EFA Forum

Advocacy / Lobbying INGOs, corporate lobbies, trade unions, think tanks

Funding TNCs sponsoring international conferences/ Global Compact

Information / Watchdogs Unions, international campaigns, INGOs, think tanks

Management of projects INGOs

What do IOs do? (i)

• Classify and explain the world, and highilight the problems that have to be solved (agenda setting)

• Disseminate ideas, norms and causal theories (settlement of preferences on how the problems have to be solved)

GLOBAL AGENDA - PROGRAMMES

• Public-Private Partnerships• Conditioned Cash Transfers• Decentralization• School Based Management• Evaluation• Life-long learning• Child centred pedagogies• Participation, accountability by the community

What do IOs do? (ii)

• Impose certain decisions• Define standards• Facilitate harmonization / coordination of

policies• Install interdependences and set benchmarks

Education for DevelopmentINTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

A new Global Compact?

World Declaration – Education for All (EFA), Jomtien (1990).

Dakar Framework: EFA in 2015 (Dakar 2000).

MDGs: (New York 2000).

• (i) expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood education

• (ii) ensuring that by 2015 all children have access to and complete free and compulsory primary education

• (iii) ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met (iv) achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult literacy

• (v) eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education

• (vi) improving all aspects of the quality of education

6 targets

MDGs

New principles in Aid for Education [Paris (2005) and Accra (2008)

Declarations]

To empower the states in front of donnors:• Policy dialogue, ownership and partnership.• Harmonization, alignment, efficiency “Sector Wide

Approach”• Predictibility and sustainability.• New modalities: general budget support, sectorial

budget support, common funds.

IOs: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE STATE

• Hyper globalists:–Declining authority of the state–State loses control– IOs have the power

• Sceptics:–Globalization is a myth–Regionalization more important than globalization–State power is not altered

IOs AND THE STATE: transformationalist

• Authority is transformed and re-allocated

• The State loses autonomy (capacity to create independent national policies in certain areas).

• The State continues being the main decision taker, but: – Most points of the agenda are settled by IOs.– IOs influence / frame the priorities and preferences of states

• But, it is difficult to generalise: some states are “passive”, some of them are “active” in the context of IOs

WB weighted voting system

G-8

Other OECD (21 c.) Non-OECD

(148 countries)

Case study: Education in the WTO/GATS

• WTO/GATS and Education Basics• Research question and design• The power of the WTO, and the power of

member states

WTO headquarters

World Trade Organization

Year/members 1995 (152 members; Geneva)Functions / Power source

- Trade negotiation forums- Dispute settlement- Binding trade agreements

Education Problems - No educational viewProgrammes - GATS, General Agreement on Trade

in ServicesDe facto proposal - Higher education trade liberalization

GATS basics

- General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) promotes trade liberalization of education (and all kind of services) at a planetary scale

- Negotiated by the 150+ member countries of the WTO

- Negotiation led by the Trade Ministry

- Widely contested by education community

SERVICES SECTORS

1. Professional services2. Communication3. Construction4. Distribution5. Education

– Primary– Secundary– Higher Education– Adult– Other

6. Energy7. Environmental8. Financial9. Health and social ss10. Tourism11. Transport12. Other

GATS basics (ii):

How to export a service? • MODE 1: Cross-border supply• MODE 2: Consumption abroad• MODE 3: Commercial presence• MODE 4: Presence of natural people

Who is interested in trade in services?

Who exports education?

Who exports education?

THE GATS AND EDUCATION DEBATETOPICS INTERPRETATIVE REPERTOIRES

GATS Critics (The GATS…) ProGATS (The GATS…)

1. Right to regulate of the states

1.1. … restricts the policy space of countries and its capacity to regulate education

1.2. … respects the regulation capacity of the states

2.Develop-ment

2.1. … promotes an unequal exchange between North and South in education services

2.2. favors the development of the education systems in Southern countries

3. Access to Education

3.1. … privatize the funding to education and the access become more restricted

3.2. ... creates more offer and investment in education

4. Education Quality

4.1. … undermines education quality

4.2. … favors education quality through competition

5. Traditional functions of education

5.1. alters traditional functions of education (social cohesion, nation building, etc.) Education becomes an end itself.

5.2. … strengthens and complements the traditional functions of education

6. Labor conditions

6.1. … damages labor conditions of teachers

6.2. … improves labor conditions and creates new jobs in the education field

7. Prognostic (proposas)

7.1. Rupture (education out of GATS)

7.2. Reform(education in GATS but subordinated to education policies and priorities)

7.3. Continuity(deepening liberalization commitments is positive for education)

WCHE09 Final Communiqué (first draft) on GATS

• “Trade in services is a manifestation of globalization that has caused great concern in the academic community; in particular with GATS under the WTO. Member States should not consider higher education as a commercial transaction…”

WCHE09 Final Communiqué (final draft) on GATS

Research question

• What makes education liberalization in the WTO/GATS possible?

Alternative formulation: • Why do (developing) countries decide to

adopt - or not to adopt –liberalization commitments within the WTO / GATS?

New countries facing the WTO accession rules

Decision Making: LDCs in trouble

-Human resources unbalanced

-1/3 of LDC without a permanent office

-Quad: 17 permanent representatives

-Buying the consensus

-Credits

-Debt cancellation

Argentina and Chile in the GATS and education negotiations

WTO/GATS global rules

• “Progressive Liberalization” principle

• Impediments for countries to break off the established liberalization commitments

• The methodology of the negotiation: flexibilities

The politics of decision taking at the state level

• Relation Ministry of Trade - education stakeholders:

– Level of inclusiveness– Level of delegation

Teacher unions from the point of view of trade negotiators

“Teachers’ Unions? Yes, they talk about GATS, but they have not discussed the topic very deeply; they are confused, they are afraid… [T]hey are afraid that education could be privatized. But in our country there has been private education for the last 50 years. Whatever the government does to make education more efficient, they think that education will be privatized…”

(Trade negotiator 07, Geneva, 2006)

Teacher unions from the point of view of trade negotiators

“The unions make a lot of noise, but instead of protecting education they just want to protect their jobs. They want to prevent teachers coming from other countries from working in Chile”

(Interview Trade negotiator 03, Geneva, 2006)

“In the WTO context, there are a lot of things that are irrational. The basic premise of the system is that free trade is good, that Smith and Ricardo were right. (...) However, the negotiation process is inverted. First, we talk about liberalizing the economy as a ‘concession’, as a cost, when actually it is a benefit.(...) A lot of countries, above all the developing countries, do not understand the basic premise of free trade and the rules of the game ... [In the negotiations] there is a deeply wrong ideology (...) The recent history demonstrates that the free trade premise is right, that it works ... If we organize an open discussion, it is clear which argument [should] win. However, it doesn’t happen.”

(Trade negotiator 12, Geneva, 2006)

NEGOTIATION RATIONALE:

FREE TRADE OR MERCANTILISM?

Negotiation rationale: key mechanism

• Key mechanism: Use of education as a bargaining chip

• Empirical evidences:

We always perceive services as a bargaining chip; we could make concessions if we get something back. That is our basic logic for negotiating services. The premise that “liberalization is good” doesn’t work with us. We do not believe in this doctrine; in fact, this discourse sets my nerves on edge. Here, nobody believes it, not even their preachers [referring to the WTO staff] believe it. (Trade negotiator 01, Geneva, 2006)

• I always see the services area as an instrument of developed countries for opening new markets, which is totally legitimate... [However,] we are not going to improve our current services offer, which is actually a good offer, without receiving something in exchange, [and not just] receiving empty promises in agriculture. (Trade negotiator 15, Buenos Aires, 2006)

• Education? No, we don’t have any commitment at the WTO level. Neither have we received any demand on education. We will only commit education if we can receive something in exchange (…). In the end, we present an all unique list, we do a general balance and education is just one part. (Trade negotiator 07, Geneva, 2006)

Red line over education

Red line over education

• Education is an interesting case. Initially, we thought that we would have offensive interests (…) but the defensive parties came onto the scene and, because of ideology or lack of knowledge, they neglected any possibility of making offers [or] demands in education because they say that education should not be a commodity or a tradable object […] in fact, even a statement against the negotiation of education within the WTO was adopted.

(Trade negotiator 02, Geneva, 2006)

WTO RULES [progressive liberalization, decision taking procedures, accession rules, etc.]

Harmonization Imposition [for new members]

Decision of the countries: Trade liberalization of education

International Trade in Education Regime GLOBAL SCALE

LOCAL SCALE

Hyperglobalist assumption

WTO RULES [progressive liberalization, decision taking procedures, accession rules, etc.]

Lame Internacional Trade in Education Regime GLOBAL SCALE

Countries decision: Trade liberalization of education (?)

LOCAL SCALE

Informal rules: MERCANTILSIM

Education as a bargaining chip

Level of ambition of the negotiation round Harmonization

Imposition

Caution

- Centralization level of the decision by the Trade Ministry - Gov. ideology - Education stakeholder demands

Transformationist model

To conclude

• The WTO/GATS is a causal source of important transformations in current education systems.

• The WTO sets the agenda, imposes certain decisions on countries and promotes the harmonization of certain policies.

• Nevertheless: • The impact of these global forces is mediated by the mercantilist

ideology (representation of national-industrial interests) that predominates in the negotiation process.

• Under certain conditions, the state/society complexes at the local level can successfully challenge the constitution of the global trade in education regime promoted by the WTO.

COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS ARE WELCOME!!