Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Global Governance of Education and Training: as reviewed from Jomtien via Incheon to New York

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Education Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

By applying the concepts, practices, and limits of the theories of global governance of education, this study tries to reveal the characteristics of education for all (EFA), the millennium development goals (MDGs), and the sustainable development goals (SDGs) from the dimensions of norms and rules, accountability, transparency, participation, and effectiveness and efficiency. For the retrospective analysis of the global agendas, the authors use the modified definition of Rametsteiner’s good governance to examine selected literature of academic analyses and publicized official documents and statistics. In doing so, the study postulates a complex web of power holders in the agenda-making process on the global level, which functions as a mechanism to exert significant influence to re-orient education agendas in the global community. The study finds that from the perspective of global governance of education, the governance of EFA was weak in the dimensions of accountability and effectiveness. MDG governance was stronger than EFA’s, but this strength cannot be interpreted as good, or ideal, governance. The actual process of MDG agenda setting, despite the pervading rhetoric of country ownership and development partnership, is overwhelmingly donor-centered, which contradicts the dimensions of norms and rules as well as participation. The analysis on the governance of EFA and the MDGs verify that power asymmetry is inevitable in a multi-stakeholder governance approach. Such contradictory relations among the dimensions of good global governance puts SDG 4 in a dilemma. Therefore, the study emphasizes the importance of securing effectiveness and accountability for SDG 4. Otherwise, the future of the education SDG will be unpromising.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Reproduced with permission from 14 September 2015 from OCED Statistics

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA, Education for All Movement) is Government of India’s flagship programme for achievement of Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE) in a time-bound manner, as mandated by 86th amendment to the Constitution of India making free and compulsory Education to the Children of 6–14 years age group, a Fundamental Right.

  2. See http://www.iati.dfid.gov.uk/iati_documents/4005481.odt.

  3. See for the full contents at: http://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/global-neighbourhood/.

  4. See more in NORRAG (2014), pp. 32–33.

  5. The previous 2001 version of the education-related indicator for MDG 3 concerned the ratio of literate females to males of 15–24 year olds. This indicator was omitted in the 2008 official list of the Inter-agency and Expert Group on the Millennium Development Goal Indicators (IAEG). The IAEG was set up in 2002 to develop and analyze the MDG assessment indicators (Manning 2009, p. 97). Since 2005, the UN Statistical Commission also examined the indicators for discrepancies or technicalities, although without say in indicator selection (Manning 2009, p. 11). The original set of indicators and subsequent revisions were then presented and approved by the UN General Assembly.

  6. See IMF (2016). Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/np/prsp/prsp.aspx.

  7. Filmer et al. (2006) of the World Bank echoed some of these concerns and proposed moving away from the MDG indicators that only measure years of schooling - the “output goal of universal completion”—to the new Millennium Learning Goals (MLG) that measure “outcome goals of universal competencies” (p. 4). Because years of schooling is not the same as the competencies students gain out of those years, the MLG would better assess the education performance of the age cohorts both in and out of school (p. 10). The issue of quality would also be included within the MLG, defined as competencies. Although the MLG does introduce more nuance into education quality measurements, it is also criticized as similarly “reductionist quantifiable targets” that “will undermine quality of education if it becomes the main criterion by which governments are held to account on the international stage” (Barrett 2011, pp. 128–129).

  8. See more at: http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Pages/post-2015-indicators.aspx#sthash.AOCfwfww.dpuf.

Abbreviations

CGG:

The Commission on Global Governance

DAC:

Development Assistance Committee

DFID:

Department for International Development

EFA:

Education for all

EFA-FTI:

EFA fast track initiative

FTI:

Fast track initiative

GEM:

Global education monitoring

GGE:

Global Governance of Education

GGET:

Global Governance of Education and Training

GMR:

Global monitoring report

GPE:

Global partnership for education

IAEG-SDGs:

Inter-agency expert group on sustainable development goal indicators

IDT:

International development targets

INGO:

International Non-Governmental Organization

IO:

International Organization

MDG:

Millennium development goal

MLG:

Millennium learning goal

MOE:

Ministry of Education

NGO:

Non-Governmental Organization

ODA:

Official development assistance

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PISA:

Programme for International Student Assessment

PRSP:

Poverty reduction strategy paper

SACMEQ:

The Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality

SDG:

Sustainable development goal

SSA:

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan

TAG:

Technical Advisory Group

TIMSS:

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study

TVET:

Technical and vocational education and training

UEE:

Universalization of elementary education

UIS:

UNESCO Institute of Statistics

UN:

United Nations

UNDESA:

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

UNDP:

United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO:

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNFPA:

United Nations Population Forum

UNGA:

United Nations General Assembly

UNICEF:

United Nations Children’s Fund

UPE:

Universal primary education

WEF:

World Education Forum

References

  • Archer, D. (2005). Critical issues around the MDGs and education. Convergence, 38(3), 19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnove, R. (2013). Introduction: Reframing comparative education: The dialectic of the global and the local. In R. Arnove, C. Torres & S. Franz (Eds.), Comparative education: The dialectic of the global and the local (pp. 1–25). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, A. M. (2011). A millennium learning goal for education post-2015: A question of outcomes or processes. Comparative Education, 47(1), 119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennell, P., & Furlong, D. (1998). Has Jomtien made any difference? Trends in donor funding for education and basic education since the late 1980s. World Development, 26(1), 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. (2011). Governance and governmentality after neoliberalism. Policy & Politics, 39(4), 457–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F., & Boas, I. (2010). Preparing for a warmer world: Towards a global governance system to protect climate refugees. Global Environment Politics, 10(1), 60–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock-Utne, B. (2000). Whose education for all? Recolonization of the African mind. London: Garland Science Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchert, L. (2002). Education for all: An attainable dream? Prospects, 32(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, N., & Felsman, C. (2012). Post-2015 education MDGs. Washington, DC: Results for Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbonnier, G., Carton, M., & King, K. (2014). International education and development: Histories, parallels, crossroads. Education, learning, training: Critical issues for development. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr-Hill, R. (2010). Estimating numbers of missing out of school children. Paper presented at British Association for International and Comparative Education (BAICE), University of East Anglia 10–12 September 2010.

  • Cingolani, L., Thomsson, K., & de Crombrugghe, D. (2013). State capacity and bureaucratic autonomy: Their impact on development goals. Maastricht: Maastricht University. Mimeographed document.

  • Colclough, C., & De, A. (2010). The impact of aid on education policy in India. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(5), 497–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commission on Global Governance. (1995). Our global neighbourhood: The report of the commission on global governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, J. (2010). Reflections on UNESCO’s World Education Reports and the Global Monitoring Reports on Education for All. Norrag News 43, pp. 42–44.

  • DaSilva, C. M. (2011). Shifting aims of aid to education. Comparative and International Education/Éducation Comparée et Internationale, 40(3), 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delamonica, E., Mehrotra, S., & Vandemoortele, J. (2001). Is EFA affordable? Estimating the global minimum cost of ‘education for all’. New York: UNICEF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson, R., Lee, K., & Drager, N. (2002). Global health governance: A conceptual review. Geneva: WHO.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Filmer, D., Hasan, A., & Pritchett, L. (2006). A millennium learning goal: Measuring real progress in education. Center for Global Development Working Paper, 97.

  • Gable, S., Lofgren, H., & Osorio-Rodarte, I. (2014). The Post-2015 global agenda: A framework for country diagnostics. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, H. (2004). Education for all: The globalization of learning targets. Comparative Education, 40(1), 7–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grindle, M. S. (2004). Despite the odds: The contentious politics of education reform. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyneman, S. P. (2003). The history and problems in the making of education policy at the World Bank 1960–2000. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(3), 315–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyneman, S. P. (2006). The effectiveness of development assistance in education: An organizational analysis. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 9(1), 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyneman, S. P. (2012). Education policy and the World Bank: When models become monopolies. In C. S. Collins & A. W. Wiseman (Eds.), Education strategy in the developing world: Understanding the World Bank’s education policy revision (pp. 43–62). Bingley: Emerald Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, S., Rothstein, B., & Nasiritousi, N. (2009). Quality of government: What you get. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 135–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, D., Savoia, A., & Sen, K. (2014). Governance as a global development goal? Setting, measuring and monitoring the post-2015 development agenda. Global Policy, 6(2), 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J. D. (2005). Targeting education: The politics of performance and the prospects of ‘Education for All’. International Journal of Educational Development, 25(4), 268–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, N. (2007). Education for all meets political democratization: Free primary education and the neoliberalization of the Malawian school and state. Comparative Education Reviews, 51(3), 281–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, K. (2007). Multilateral agencies in the construction of the global agenda on education. Comparative Education, 43(3), 377–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, K. (2014). Post-2015 and global governance: Complexity, competition and cooperation. Norrag News, 51, 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, K. (2015). The World Education Forum (WEF) at Incheon, South Korea: What reflections, memories, legacy? Norrag News, 52.

  • King, K., & Palmer, R. (2013). Post-2015 agendas: Northern Tsunami, Southern Ripple? The case of education and skills. International Journal of Education and Development, 33(5), 409–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, K., & Palmer, R. (2014). Post-2015 and the Global Governance of Education and Training. NORRAG working paper series No.7. Geneva: NORRAG.

  • Klees, S. J., Samoff, J., Stromquist, N. P., & Bonal, X. (2012). The World Bank and education critiques and alternatives. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. M. (2007). Diversity in convergence: Access to education for all. Compare, 37(5), 577–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. M. (2011). Policy dialogue and target setting: Do current indicator of Education for All signify progress? Journal of Education Policy, 26(4), 571–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, R. (2009). Using indicators to encourage development: Lessons from the Millennium Development Goals DIIS Report 2009:01. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, A. (2014). Who are the custodian of Pacific ‘post-2015’ education futures? Policy discourses, education for all and the millennium development goals. International Journal of Educational Development, 39, 173–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mundy, K. (2006). Education for all and the new development compact. International Review of Education, 52(1), 23–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundy, K. (2016). “Leaning in” on Education for All. Comparative Education Review, 60(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, T. H. T. (2010). Deconstructing Education for All: Discourse, power and the politics of inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(4), 341–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NORRAG. (1990). Norrag News, No.7: World conference on education for all and international literacy year. Geneva: NORRAG.

  • NORRAG. (2014). Workshop report: Global Governance of Education & Training and the Politics of Data. Geneva: Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.

  • OECD. (1996). Shaping the 21st century: The contribution of development cooperation. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wost, C., Gupta, J., & Petry, D. (2008). Governance and the global water system: A theoretical exploration. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organization, 14(4), 419–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Psacharopoulos, G. (1986). Financing education in developing countries: An exploration of policy options. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rametsteiner, E. (2009). Governance concepts and their application in forest policy initiatives from global to local levels. Small-Scale Forestry, 8(2), 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, S. (2014). From thin to thickening Global Governance of Education. Norrag News 51, pp. 24–26.

  • Robertson, S., Novelli, M., Dale, R., Tikly, L., Dachi, H., & Alphonce, N. (2007). Globalization, education and development: Ideas, actors and dynamics. London: DfiD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayed, Y. (2010). Good quality education through the GMR. Norrag News, 43, 54–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stutt, C., & Kepe, T. (2010). Implementing Education for All—Whose agenda, whose change? The case study of the Ghana National Education Campaign Coalition. International Journal of Educational Development, 30, 369–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Q. (n.d.). Goal 4 ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Retrieved from http://lusaka.sites.unicnetwork.org/tag/unesco/.

  • Tikly, L. (2017). The future of education for all as a global regime of educational governance. Comparative Education Review, 61(1), 22–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres, R. M. (2001). What happened at the World Education Forum? Adult Education and Development, 56.

  • Tota, P. M. (2014). Filling the gaps: The role and impact of international non-governmental organisations in ‘Education for All’. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 12(1), 92–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (1990). World Declaration on Education for All & Framework for Action. World Conference on Education for All. Paris: UNESCO.

  • UNESCO. (2000). Dakar framework for action, education for all: Meeting our collective commitment. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2002). EFA global monitoring report 2002. Education for all: is the world on track? Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2006). EFA Global Monitoring Report: Literacy for life. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2015a). Incheon declaration: Education 2030: Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2015b). EFA monitoring report. Education for all 2000–2015: Achievements and challenges. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2015). The millennium development goals report 2015. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2016). Addis ababa action agenda monitoring commitments and actions-inaugural report 2016. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations General Assembly. (2001). Road map towards the implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration. Report of the Secretary-General, A/56/326. Retrieved Sept 6 2001 from http://www.un.org/documents/ga/docs/56/a56326.pdf.

  • Unterhalter, E. (2013). Education targets, indicators and post-2015 development agenda: Education for All, the MDGs, and human development. The power of numbers: A critical review of MDG targets for human development and human rights. Institute of Education, University of London.

  • Woodward, R. (2009). The organisation for economic co-operation and development. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1992) Governance and development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1995). Priorities and strategies in education. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Education Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

    Bong Gun Chung

  2. Global Education Cooperation, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

    In Sun Jeon & Rebekah H. Lee

  3. Department of Education, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea

    Inyoung Lee & Sung Sang Yoo

  4. Seoul National University, Room 301 Building 11, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, South Korea

    Sung Sang Yoo

Authors
  1. Bong Gun Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. In Sun Jeon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebekah H. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Inyoung Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sung Sang Yoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sung Sang Yoo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chung, B.G., Jeon, I.S., Lee, R.H. et al. Global Governance of Education and Training: as reviewed from Jomtien via Incheon to New York. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 19, 319–336 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9544-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9544-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation