Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

REACHING THE MARGINALIZEDLevelling the playing fieldand low Education Development Index districtswere negligible, but in 2008/2009, districts in thelowest quartile on the index received twice asmuch per child as those in the highest quartile(Jhingran and Sankar, 2009; Figure 3.30). Brazilprovides another illustration of equity-basedfinancing, with the education budget weightedto provide additional support to the poorest statesand districts (Box 3.24).Targeting regional development. Educationfinancing can be integrated into financingstrategies for regions with high levels of poverty,large ethnic minority populations and geographicdisadvantages. The effectiveness of suchprogrammes in narrowing regional disparitiesdepends on the level of redistribution andthe overall effect on public spending.While almost all governments have someredistributive financing mechanisms in place,their effectiveness varies. The United Republicof Tanzania has adopted a needs-based financingformula for education, but it appears to havedone little to narrow financing gaps between localgovernment authorities. In fact, recent evidencesuggests the gaps may be widening, with damagingconsequences for equity in education. For each childaged 7 to 13, the richest thirty local governmentauthorities are allocated twice as much as thepoorest thirty. The pupil/teacher ratio is nearly 70:1in the poorest 20% of authorities and 44:1 in therichest. Such outcomes suggest that underlyinginequalities heavily outweigh redistribution. Thereis a strong relationship between spending per childin each authority and the pass rate at Standard 7(United Republic of Tanzania Government, 2008;World Bank, 2006i).Budget systems vary in their level of commitmentto poverty reduction and the targeting ofmarginalized areas. Within Kenya’s unitary budgetsystem, a broad range of mechanisms is used tosupport decentralized spending. The ConstituencyDevelopment Fund allocates 3.5% of governmentrevenue for national poverty reduction efforts butattaches surprisingly little weight (around 25% inthe current formula) to poverty levels, as distinctfrom the overall population in the district. Thenational budget also identifies ‘core povertyprogrammes’ representing around 7% of totalplanned expenditure. They have played a key rolein financing free primary education but havesuffered from low levels of disbursement, limitedtransparency and the inclusion of programmesFigure 3.30: Redistribution of public finance benefits the lowest performingdistricts in IndiaPer child allocations to worst and best performance quartiles on Education DevelopmentIndex, IndiaRupees per child (current prices)1 6001 2008004002005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008 2008/2009with weak links to poverty reduction (WorldBank, 2009f). One result is that areas andgroups identified in this Report as centres ofmarginalization in education – notably the aridand semi-arid north-eastern areas inhabitedmainly by pastoralists – receive insufficientsupport (World Bank, 2009f). The Kenyan budgetframework thus suffers from both a weakcommitment to redistribution and poor delivery.Countries with highly devolved financial systemsand deep geographical inequalities face distinctiveproblems. Poor states and regions have the leastcapacity to raise the revenue they need to delivergood-quality education. Yet they may be home tolarge populations facing restricted opportunitiesfor education. Overcoming marginalization is likelyto require higher levels of per capita spendingon the most disadvantaged, while the publicfinancing system is pulling in the other direction.The result is a vicious circle, with poverty andlow average income limiting access to education,and deprivation in education reinforcing povertyand regional inequalities.Breaking the circle requires a strong commitmentto redistribution through public finance. Thatcommitment has often been lacking, as witnessedDistricts with worsteducation indicatorsDistricts with besteducation indicatorsNotes: The allocations shown are those provided under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme.The district-level Education Development Index takes into account access (primary school coverage,ratio of upper primary to primary schools); infrastructure (availability of classrooms, toilets and drinking water);pupil/teacher ratio; enrolment of 6- to 14-year-olds; primary and upper primary school completion rates;and equity (girls’ enrolment, female literacy).Source: Jhingran and Sankar (2009).Overcomingmarginalizationis likely to requirehigher levels ofper capita spendingon the mostdisadvantaged211