Recapturing the Narrative of International Development

A recent paper from Sakiko Fukada-Parr, entitled Recapturing the Narrative of International Development. 

'Though it is difficult to assess whether the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have contributed to poverty trends across the world, their impact on the discourse on international development has been powerful and unexpected.  By articulating the complex challenges of development in eight goals with concrete 2015 targets, the MDGs have had unprecedented success in drawing attention to poverty as an urgent global priority. But the narrow emphasis has also led to detracting attention from other important priorities-the complex strategic choices in economic policy-and has simplified development policy debates.   

The MDGs have created a new narrative of international development centred on global poverty as a compelling moral concern. This narrative convincingly appeals to rich country “publics and parliaments” and to new global philanthropists. But the simplification of development to eight goals has reduced the development agenda to meeting basic needs, stripped of the Millennium Declaration’s vision for development with social justice and human rights. The narrative leaves out any mention of equity, empowerment of people and building sustainable productive capacity for economic growth. It has no room for understanding poverty as related to the underlying power relations within and between countries and the asymmetries in the global economy. It leaves out much of the broader policy agendas, including the systemic issues of the global economy that have long been priorities for developing countries in international economic negotiations, and impacts of liberalization and privatization on the poor that have been priorities for the critics of globalization. Goals galvanize concern and action but quantification can oversimplify complex challenges with unintended consequences for the way these challenges are defined.   

While there is widespread consensus on their importance in drawing attention to poverty as an urgent global priority, the MDG framework has generated some sharp criticisms. These include:  

• composition of the targets-what was included and not included, the levels at which they were set or not set, the methodology for measuring implementation progress;   

• reliability of the MDGs as a development framework given their narrow scope and oversimplification, and bias against African and other countries because of failure to take into account initial conditions, and the arbitrary and incoherent methodologies used to set the targets;   

• non-participatory process by which they were formulated by bureaucrats without adequate intergovernmental negotiations nor open consultation with non-governmental organizations (NGOs); and   

• inappropriate application of the goals as national planning targets.'  

Important reading in light of goals such as the MDGs resulting in a disproportional global focus upon primary education. Fukada-Parr covers ten critical issues that need to be addressed in redesigning development goals - these include: adapting targets to national contexts; clarifying the purpose; and acknowledging inequality within countries.

You can read the full paper here. 

It seems this is actually predicated on the assumption that global development targets are a good thing though. I'm not sure I'm entirely convinced. Thoughts? Are there better alternatives?

Has the time come for freely available academic journals?

In light of posts on Open Courses, I thought this article on academic journals being gated - and the need to change this - warranted posting. I originally read the piece over at the Aidnography blog.

I'm sure we must have all been there: you need access to a paper, but you've forgotten your Athens password, or your institution doesn't subscribe to that particular journal. Apart from this 'first world problem', the more important issue is that in theory, academic research is carried out in order to influence practice. However, you don't need me to tell you that the reality in the development and humanitarian sector can be completely different. Academic research tends to - with I'm sure a few exceptions - remain just that: in the realm of academia. If research is to do what it is meant to then, and actually change the way we do things in the field, is it time we moved towards openly available journals? At a time of various Open Source learning opportunities online, is the concept of gated papers, and therefore knowledge hoarding a little dated and contradictory in light of advocacy for free education?

Would be great to hear your thoughts - get posting in the comments box below.
 
P.S. Did you know you can follow the blog over on Twitter?

Reiterating the negative impact of emergencies on education

From the report entitled Building a Culture of Resilience:  

'The impact of the natural disasters and political and economic turmoil on children and the education sector is immense.  In the Horn of Africa, the mortality rate for Somali children is one of the highest in the world and school attendance is the lowest globally. Nearly 9 million children are out of school in [Eastern and Southern Africa Region] ESAR, many of them due to emergencies such as conflict, socio‐political crises, and recurring natural disasters. These emergencies regularly disrupt schooling for millions more. In countries like Madagascar, where large‐scale disasters like cyclones occur regularly, education is disrupted sometimes for months, increasing drop‐out rates and negatively impacting on attendance rates generally. In Rwanda and Malawi, frequent flooding and disease outbreaks interrupt schooling. Malawi also experiences heavy annual seasonal wind storms which often damage school roofs, forcing classes to share learning spaces or meet outside in unbearable conditions during the rainy season. Comoros experienced a fuel crisis in August 2008 and a teachers’ strike in 2010, closing schools and postponing year‐end examinations. In addition to the natural disasters and man‐made emergencies in ESAR, the education sector in nearly all of the countries faces severe lack of resources and funding and is heavily reliant on external support. Teacher shortages, large class sizes, lack of up‐to‐date and relevant learning aids, and inadequate classrooms, to name only a few factors, combine to make progress in the education sector challenging. Despite these obstacles, there are noteworthy achievements to report from the ESAR education sector. Rwanda, one of the five countries that participated in this evaluation, has attained one of the highest primary school enrolment rates in Africa, with nearly 96 per cent of boys and 97 per cent of girls attending primary school.' 

The above passage alone highlights the strong link between Disaster Risk Reduction and educational outcomes. 

The full report includes Disaster Risk Reduction Capacity Gaps, and 16 'Lessons Learned'. Worth a look - check out the full report here.

Report: Protecting Education from Attack

A recent report from the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack entitled Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education from Attack.

Protecting higher education from attack

'Attacks on higher education may occur in countries where there is not an ongoing armed conflict, but when 

national governments, opposition groups, or other non-state actors fail to respect the ‘neutrality’ of education. 

It is therefore worth considering responses to attacks on education beyond situations of armed conflict in countries 

in which education is repressed, polarized, or highly politicized. 

Attacks on academic staff can often 

occur for publishing research as well as undertaking teaching.  

The negative consequences of attacks on higher education affect not just universities, but also primary and 

secondary schools that depend on quality teachers trained at the tertiary level and on research that informs 

pedagogy and curriculum at all levels. Attacks on higher education institutions and personnel also cause a 

‘brain drain’ as threatened scholars flee or are killed, diminishing the quality of education overall. The situation 

for scholars in Iraq is an extreme example: over 460 Iraqi scholars have been assassinated from 2003 to 

December 2011. 

Many more have been kidnapped and their families targeted or threatened in great numbers,

leaving them with no option but to flee. 

 

Overall, those assisting higher education personnel indicate that they are assisting those that have fled from 

many countries in almost every region of the world. Scholars and academics who face persecution work in many 

different disciplines - sciences, social sciences, arts, and humanities - meaning that attacks on higher 

education are not always just about silencing the political opposition, but also about controlling ideas and knowledge in society.' 

The report takes a look at attacks on education from the perspective of: protection, prevention, advocacy, and monitoring and reporting. The end of the report provides several relevant country profiles. The sections on conflict sensitive policy and curriculum reform are worth reading. Check out the report here.

P.S. Did you know you can follow the blog on Twitter?

Research methodologies for Education in Emergencies

A paper from Laura H.V. Wright entitled Education in Emergencies: Research Methodologies Identifying Successes and Gaps:

'Because EiE research is emerging concurrently with the push for education to be considered the fourth pillar of humanitarian aid, much of the research is conducted and/or used for the purpose of EiE advocacy and project design, focusing on a linear model of relief to development. This advocacy push has blocked the field from developing “strong theoretical and analytical tools to support critical scholarly inquiry and research” (Rappleye & Paulson, 2007, p. 260). This, as evidenced in the literature, results in a dearth of theoretical research and research that critically examines the positives and negatives of education (Bush & Saltarelli, 2000), and long-term effects of persons affected by emergencies. Education theory, such as that presented by Davies (2003) and Novelli and Cardoza (2008), should be infused into the research design process. The use of theory is critical. It could aid researchers in linking different patterns found in evidence and increase the credibility of qualitative research conducted in EiE. 

[...] 

Innovative participatory research methodologies have taken root in the EiE field (Mitchell, 2011; Bengtsson & Bartlett, 2011). The use of child-friendly qualitative methods that seek to understand children‟s perceptions of their own education and aspirations is pertinent. The participatory studies thus far have predominantly focused on examining NGO-based education programs. This method should also be used to understand non-formal, community-developed education programs that are not influenced/developed by INGOs and international organizations. A central tension that lies at the heart of comparative and international education, and plays out in education in emergencies, is the belief of being able to “learn from elsewhere,” constrained by the realization that contextual differences make importing „best practices‟ observed elsewhere extremely problematic (Rappleye & Paulson, 2007).'

Get the paper here.  

More free knowledge

In light of past posts on Open Courses from the likes of Yale and various other top universities and institutes, I have more to share. This time from the World Bank.

The World Bank's Open Knowledge Repository is freely accessible for the public. Over 2000 books, reports and research articles. Education-related resources are - thankfully - included. Enjoy. 

Summarising ODI's Humanitarian Space Report

ODI's Humanitarian Policy Group recently launched the Report: Humanitarian space: a review of trends and issues. In light of my focus on emergency education, this post briefly summarises some of its key points and the issues raised at the launch event.

Key Points

• The widely held belief that humanitarian space is shrinking is misleading.
• Politics tends to be viewed as something removed from humanitarian work. Whilst it is often admitted humanitarian work has political consequences, the organisations often see themselves outside of this sphere. 
• Agency space is not synonymous with humanitarian space. 
• Discussion of the protection of civilians is absent from discussions of humanitarian space, rather focuses on the ability of international aid agencies to provide material assistance - we need to move away from this.
• The fact that the majority of humanitarian organisations are from the global North leads to mistrust in various contexts e.g. neocolonial agendas; imposing Western values - as witnessed in Somalia. 
• Requests from various 'beneficiaries' from Latin America to the Horn of Africa welcoming assistance with preventive measures not intervention. 
• Where does the diaspora fit into humanitarian interventions?
• Politics tends to be overlooked, instead technical issues tend to be focused upon. 
• There is a need to depart from the equation of humanitarianism with the provision of material provision of relief. 

A worthy read encouraging self-reflection. Get the Policy Brief. Get the full report. 

Utilising the skills and qualifications of urban refugees

My guest post on the Education and Urban Poverty blog. 

Increasing the number of years in education - is pre-school the answer?

New policy paper released from the EFA Global Monitoring Report Team at UNESCO:

Studies in developing countries on the benefits of preschool vary in scope, but paint a similar picture overall, demonstrating positive effects on subsequent primary school performance. Participation is found to be particularly beneficial for those from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds [...] Attending pre-school also tends to increase the years of education that children eventually attain. 

Get the policy paper here.

Establishing effective partnerships for humanitarian research and practice

Today's post is based upon the above event which took place at the Overseas Development Institute today.

To sum up, the event aimed to launch the Effective academic-humanitarian collaboration: A practical resource to support academic and humanitarian organisations working together report from Enhancing Learning and Research for Humanitarian Assistance (ELRHA). Areas discussed included:

• the benefit of researcher-practitioner partnerships and the two-way learning process involved;
• the necessity to acknowledge the political nature of humanitarianism and understand the people involved in such projects;
• the worthiness of humanitarian research, however the pointlessness of it if not effectively communicated and consequently implemented in practice; 
• the current lack of communication between practitioners and 'beneficiaries';
• the lack of consideration of the long-term impact of projects.

Whilst not explicitly mentioning education, the event and the discussions involved are extremely relevant to educational research and educational development in the global context, particularly given the current gap between research carried out in the academic world and work in the field. A salient point coming from today's event was, and is, the time constraints humanitarian and development workers face, and therefore their inability to meet requirements outlined by research.

Of course it is not a new debate that partnerships between humanitarian research and practice could be of great benefit for all involved. However, the newly released report is perhaps different in that it aims to act as a working resource with input and examples on successful practices, or useful resources welcomed. Admittedly, I remain somewhat sceptical given past debates that have emerged in the international development community; debates which have had little impact on partnerships. I posed this scepticism to the panel at today's event with the question: How will this time be different? I was told that we can no longer afford to carry out research for research's sake, and that evidence shows the pressing need for such partnerships right now. Here's hoping this time will be different.

You can find the resource from ELRHA here. A pdf version is said to be available in a few weeks. 

Your thoughts on researcher-practitioner partnerships?

Can they help us achieve our global educational ideals more effectively?