Investing in education: The World Bank case

Click here for original source

There a lot of international organizations which function in the educational sphere. Among them are famous giants such as UNESCO and OECD. However, there is one establishment that is usually differentiated from a main body of these organizations – The World Bank (WB). Having identified the aim for further development, in particular “Learning for all”, the World Bank provides substantial loans for evolving countries. Nevertheless, there is an unstoppable discussion – whether the World Bank is an agency for support and development or it is a bank in a very nature of its activities and has only and primary aim to gain a profit. My blog answers this question by giving account on how the WB finances a borrower and articulates its educational policy.

The World Bank Group consists of five affiliated organizations; two of them represent what we call the World Bank - The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and International Development Association (IDA) (The World Bank Group). The organization was created to support developing countries with financial and technical aid. In particular, the WB has sufficient funds to offer low interest loans, free loans and grants for requesting country or organization. Whether the bank provides a loan, there is an only repeating condition – receiving side should accept bank’s vision on educational policy and follow actions prescribed by bank (Jones, 2004). Accordingly, this vision is usually described by strong market-based orientation, “The Washington consensus”. Stiglitz (2002) argues that the top management of the bank operates with this neoliberal framework, based on three main components: stabilization of inflation and interest rates, liberalization of market and privatization of public sector. The outcomes of such approach were predictable. Borrowing countries formally accepted the WB’s conditions but later just ignored them or even abandoned (Jones, 2004). Can you imagine the same policy solution for Sub-Saharan Africa and Russia, for Latin America and East Asia? Obviously, no. The fact that countries are too different in their current economy and education states was widely overlooked by the WB. Why? Maybe with a purpose. Obviously low interest rate or even a money allocated as a grant do not make the bank weaker, if the bank does not receive profit in money, it fulfills the gap by political influence.

Now let us stop on educational policy enunciated by bank. The WB’s strategy in education till 2020 “Learning for All: Investing in People’s Knowledge and Skills to Promote Development” (The World Bank, 2011) represents a goal to provide education for all children, unrelatedly to their race, position in society, intellectual skills, religion or health status. At the same time, the program usually operates with terms of human capital theory, which were widely criticized for its commitment to marketization of education. As an evidence of its market orientation, the WB’s motto in latest strategy document asserts: “Invest early. Invest smartly. Invest for all.” (The World Bank, 2011, p. 5). Catherine Sasman (2012) reports on teacher’s protest in Namibia: “Education for All (EFA) initiative is a smokescreen to privatise education and sacrifice social sciences at the altar of the World Bank neo-liberal model of education, which is profit driven and not based on human needs” (par. 1). True or not, but the same initiative was launched against the WB’s policy in many different sectors worldwide (watch video bellow) (Shah, 2001; Socialist Worker, 2002; Global Justice Now, 2010).

Finally, it is time to take a thought and count pros and cons of the WB’s activity. We can surely say that the WB invests in education, invests substantially; funds are flowing on educational needs. However, the way it happens is still arguable question. Bank’s neo-liberal policy does not open for dialogue with receiving countries; the management of organization operates first economy terms and last educational needs. The World Bank remains a bank in its nature. Therefore the new question is rising: “Do we need an international organization that does not follow the purpose of its creation – support developing countries?” As it appears the problem will be the same until the world community will turn its attention to the growing issue.

Click for original source

References:

Global Justice Now. (2010, March 17). World Bank fuelling dirty energy. Retrieved from Global Justice Now: http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/2010/mar/17/world-bank-fuelling-dirty-energy

Jones, P. W. (2004). Taking the credit: Financing and policy linkages in the education portfolio of the World Bank. In G. Steiner-Khamsi (Ed.), The global politics of educational borrowing and lending (pp. 188-200). New York and London: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Sasman, C. (2012, November 30). Namibia: Teachers Reject 'World Bank Education'. Retrieved from AllAfrica - All the Time: http://allafrica.com/stories/201212050753.html

Shah, A. (2001, July 13). IMF & World Bank Protests, Washington D.C. Retrieved from Global Issues: http://www.globalissues.org/article/23/imf--world-bank-protests-washington-dc

Socialist Worker. (2002, May 11). Global protest against the IMF and World Bank. Retrieved from Socialist Worker: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art/5530/Global+protest+against+the+IMF+and+World+Bank

Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. New York & London: Norton.

The World Bank. (2011). Learning for All: Investing in people’s knowledge and skills to promote development. Washington DC: The World Bank.

The World Bank Group. (n.d.). History. Retrieved March 22, 2015, from The World Bank: http://www.worldbank.org/en/about/history