Study purpose
Study process
The purpose of this study is to provide guidance to those involved with educational development, including providers and recipients of technical and financial support. In particular the study examines the strengths and limitations of sector wide approaches (SWA) to education sector development. Drawing on current international evidence, the study assesses whether sector wide approaches are more or less likely than other approaches to reach the education development and poverty reduction targets that are set by national Governments and development agencies.
An associated purpose is to consider whether SWA (in their various forms and interpretations) provide an effective way of forging strong partnerships with Governments, civil society and the international community in meeting agreed international targets. The study analyses factors such as public sector management, governance issues and multi-sectoral evidence (e.g. health and water supply), that may enable education sector developments to contribute more effectively to poverty reduction. The review draws on current practice and case studies from Africa, Asia, Caribbean, South and Central America and Pacific regions.
A more specific objective is to summarise the lessons learned from current official development assistance (ODA) funding approaches to strengthening effectiveness in promoting partnerships and achieving national and international policy objectives. Cross-sectoral linkages and management and organisational development of SWA are discussed. This takes account of a number of evaluation studies and working documents used in the development of education and other SWA.
It should be established at the outset that the purpose of the study is not to propose or advocate a SWA as a panacea for reform of broad education strategy and design/appraisal processes. Nor will the study attempt to prescribe a 'road map' for SWA development. As a number of funding agency development policy papers emphasise (Asian Development Bank, 1996, Department for International Development Co-operation, Finland, 1998, Secretary of State for International Development, UK, 1997), detailed approaches need to be determined on a country by country basis. This will involve political, strategic and tactical judgements about the most effective partnerships and approaches to assistance and listening to Governments, civil society and other funding agencies. Nevertheless, it is our expectation that the study will inform these judgements.
Finally, it is acknowledged that the conceptual framework for SWA, e.g. sector investment plans (SIP), sector development programmes (SDP), is becoming clearer in some respects, more diffuse in others, especially in operational aspects. Moreover, knowledge and understanding of the practice on the ground of negotiating, planning and implementing education SWA remain in their infancy. A sound understanding requires an intimate knowledge of the policy and institutional environments and the political and organisational histories and cultures in individual countries. The challenge to all aid practitioners will be to listen humbly and learn while avoiding prescriptions and conventional wisdom.
A number of standard approaches for information collection and analysis were used, including review of a number of case study documents, Annex 1, and a survey using a postal questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with key Government and funding agency officials. The study also draws on our own experience and close involvement in recent education sector development planning, including BESIP (Cambodia), ESDP (Ethiopia), ESDP (Tanzania), SSDP (Thailand), ESIP (Uganda). Where appropriate, while working in those and other countries, opportunities were taken to extend the scope of the survey. A list of those consulted is attached at Annex 2.
The study was funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and for this reason there is special emphasis on DFID policy and practice in Chapter 4. The development of the study was broadly guided by a multi-disciplinary DFID Steering Committee, including agriculture, economic, education, engineering, health, institutional and social development advisers. As the following pages will reflect, this kind of multi-sectoral and cross-cutting approach is central to optimising aid effectiveness. The intention, therefore, is to present broad views and not to be restricted to narrowly defined technical sector issues.
There are two caveats:
1) It is becoming increasingly evident that effective aid for education involves subtle, often difficult, judgements of political will, the commitment of key players to policy reform, the macro-economic policy environment and local management and implementation capacity. Therefore there are dangers in making firm deductions from case study material and selected interviews.2) The study appears at a time when the development of SWA is currently about to expand quite dramatically. It follows that much of what appears in the following pages may be subject to review as a result of normal change processes.
Despite the above, in some instances we draw conclusions where we consider it appropriate to do so; these are likely, however, to benefit from close scrutiny and further investigation. In other cases, it was considered to be more appropriate to raise issues and offer directions for future strategic analysis rather than to attempt to provide answers.
The views reflected in this study are those of the authors. Unless otherwise stated, they do not necessarily reflect DFID policy or practice.
