literacy for life; EFA global monitoring report, 2006 - Institut de ...

0
6
0
82 / CHAPTER 3
2
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Figure 3.6: Share of public education expenditure by level, 2002
Share of public education expenditure (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Pre-primary
Post-secondary
Primary
Tertiary
Secondary
Not allocated
Swaziland
Seychelles
Panama
Cuba
Rep. of Korea
Congo
Colombia
Indonesia
Costa Rica
Burundi
Bolivia
Togo
Bangladesh
Niger
Nicaragua
Belize
El Salvador
Gambia
Benin
Nepal
Philippines
Namibia
Note: Countries are sorted by increasing share of expenditure on primary education.
Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics database.
Figure 3.7: Share of primary and secondary education in total public current
expenditure on education, percentage change from 1998 to 2002
Poland
primary decreased
secondary increased
Rep. of
Korea
Philippines
Germany
Malaysia
Belize
Panama
primary and secondary
decreased
Change in current expenditure
to secondary as % of total
current expenditure to education
Costa Rica
Trinidad/Tobago
Argentina
Bangladesh
Togo
Malta
Malta
Barbados Swaziland
Netherlands
Lesotho
primary and secondary
increased
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
-5
-15
-25
Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics database.
55
45
35
25
15
5
primary increased
secondary decreased
Mexico
Change in current
expenditure to
primary as %
of total current
expenditure
to education
Korea have clearly increased the priority they give
to financing secondary education. Others, like
Togo, have managed to improve the share of
public education expenditure on secondary
education, while maintaining that of primary
education.
Efficiency can free up resources
Besides issues of distribution and equity,
ways to increase efficiency must be addressed,
Where efficiency can be improved, this can
free up resources for areas of growing
importance, such as investments in quality and
access, and in secondary education and adult
basic education as well as primary education.
Internal efficiency concerns the way in which
resources are used in the education system.
It includes drop-out and retention (discussed
in Chapter 2) as well as the allocation of
resources within education levels to teachers
and to non-salary inputs such as books and
teaching materials (discussed in the 2005
Report, with its emphasis on quality).
Institutional efficiency relates to the
institutional context in which public spending
takes place. It requires more attention in the
education sector than it has so far received.
Central education ministry resources do not
always reach the schools for which they are
intended. The percentage of non-wage public
education spending that actually arrived at
designated schools was 16% in Senegal (World
Bank, 2004a) and 40% in Zambia (World Bank,
2003b). Various factors are behind this problem,
including corruption (UNESCO, 2004a). Holding
education stakeholders accountable for their
performance can help reduce resource leaks
and hence increase education efficiency.
Extensive examples in the education literature
support the idea that community input improves
the quality of services and ensures that
providers do their job properly (Mookherjee,
2001). A particularly interesting example is
that of Uganda (Box 3.3).
Implicit in the various dimensions of
efficiency are notions of equity. If public
spending is not concentrated where people
are geographically concentrated, it is not
equitable or efficient. If it subsidizes the more
affluent at the expense of the poor, it is not
equitable or efficient. Such patterns of inequitable
and inefficient education spending are very
common. Box 3.4 illustrates the problem, using
the example of Mozambique.