Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Policy Paper 13
June 2014
This paper shows that aid to education has been on a downward spiral since 2010,
putting the achievement of existing and future global education goals at risk.
Aid reductions threaten education goals
Introduction
T
his paper reports the latest data on
development and humanitarian aid to
education. It is released to coincide with
the Global Partnership for Education’s
Replenishment Pledging Conference, which
aims to raise US$3.5 billion for education over
4 years. It is vital to recognise this financing
request as urgent, and that donors, new and old,
see this as an opportunity to refill the funding
pot for education in its time of need.
The Education for All Global Monitoring Report
has shown that there are 250 million children
who are still not learning the basics, of which
about half have spent at least four years in
school. Many countries still need aid in order
to deliver on their education promises, and
planning for education requires the kind
of predictable finance that long-term aid
commitments can provide. Yet, development aid
to education fell further in 2012 and the current
outlook is not favourable. And the share of
humanitarian aid allocated to education remains
well below target. This compromises our
prospects for achieving new, more ambitious
global education goals after 2015.
Development aid
Aid to education has been declining
since 2010
While total aid to education increased steadily
from 2002 to 2010, it has fallen by 10% since
then (Figure 1). This reduction was considerably
more than the 1% reduction in total aid levels
over the period, indicating that donors are
giving education a lower priority within their
aid budgets: the share of education in total
aid has fallen to 8.7% from a high of 10.2% in
2009 (Figure 2). By contrast, the share of health
increased over the period from 13% to 14%.
Figure 1: Aid to education has fallen by over US$1.3 billion since 2010
Total aid to education disbursements, 2002–2012
13.9
14
13.0
Total aid to secondary education
Constant 2012 US$ billions
12
Total aid to basic education
12.0
8.6
4.2
2.5
4.0
6
1.9
1.9
5.0
5.1
2007
2008
2.4
2.2
2.3
1.6
2.6
1.0
5.2
4.8
4.5
6.5
5.5
5.1
4.9
8
2
5.4
5.1
8.9
12.6
11.8
10.9
9.8
10
4
13.9
Total aid to post-secondary education
1.1
1.3
1.2
2.9
3.2
3.5
4.1
2002
2003
2004
2005
4.4
2006
6.0
6.0
5.7
5.1
0
2009
2010
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System (2014)
2011
2012
Policy Paper 13
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Share of education in total aid (%)
8
7
6
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
2011
2012
Note: Total aid excludes debt relief.
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System
(2014)
Figure 3: The share of basic education in total aid to education fell
sharply in 2012
Share of basic education in total aid to education, 2002–2012
46
44
44
42
40
40
38
36
34
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System
(2014)
Figure 4: Many of the largest donors to basic education have
decreased their aid levels
Aid to basic education, top 15 donors in 2012, relative to 2010
800
2010
2012
700
600
500
400
300
200
AsDB Special
Funds
Denmark
IMF
Netherlands
UNWRA
Norway
Canada
Japan
France
Australia
0
Germany
100
World Bank
The largest decline in aid to basic education
has affected South and West Asia, which saw
disbursements fall by 26% between 2010 and
2012 (Figure 5). The two countries with the
largest reductions in aid to basic education from
2010 to 2012 were India (a fall of US$278 million)
and Pakistan (US$60 million). Although both
are in the lower middle income bracket, they
are among the five countries with most children
out of school. In both countries, aid continues to
play an important role in helping governments
reach out-of-school children.
8.7
9
EU Institions
Aid disbursements by region: Aid to basic
education in sub-Saharan Africa, which is home
to over half the world’s out-of-school children,
fell between 2010 and 2011 and stagnated
between 2011 and 2012. Twelve countries – all
but four with low income status – saw cuts in
their aid to basic education of US$10 million
or more between 2010 and 2012. Just between
2011 and 2012, aid to Mali fell by US$45 million
and aid to Ethiopia by US$23 million.
10.2
10
United States
Aid to basic education cut for
countries most in need
11
United Kingdom
This reduction in aid comes despite a US$26
billion annual finance gap for education, and
will further postpone the achievement of
education goals for many countries. Unless
this negative trend is reversed, the likelihood
that these countries will reach new global
education goals is put at great risk, even with
extended deadlines.
12
Basic education as share of total education (%)
Compared with 2010, 28 out of 42 donors
allocated less to basic education in 2012.
The Netherlands, for instance, disbursed
almost US$200 million less in 2012 compared
to 2010. Of the donors who were among
the top ten funders in both 2010 and 2012,
only two – the United Kingdom and the
United States – increased the amounts they
have disbursed to basic education over the
period (Figure 4).
Figure 2: Donors have given less priority to education in recent years
Share of education in total aid, 2002–2012
Constant 2012 US$ millions
Aid to basic education: Despite 57 million
children and 69 million adolescents still
remaining out of school, the basic education
sub-sector witnessed a fall of US$627 million
between 2011 and 2012, bringing total levels
of aid to basic education back to 2008 levels.
The share of basic education in total aid to
education fell from 44% to 40% (Figure 3)
between 2011 and 2012.
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System
(2014)
2
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Figure 5: Aid to basic education has fallen most in sub-Saharan Africa
and South and West Asia
Total aid to basic education by region, 2010 and 2012
7
Constant 2012 US$ billions
6
5
4
Unallocated by region
or country
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.8
3
1.3
0
0.7
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.7
Latin America and
the Caribbean
East Asia and the Pacific
Arab States
South and West Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
0.9
2
1
Other regions
1.8
1.6
2010
2012
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System (2014)
Aid disbursements by income group: Following
the large decline in aid to basic education in
low income countries between 2010 and 2011,
there was a slight recovery between 2011 and
2012. However, aid to basic education in 2012
was still 6% below its 2010 level (Figure 6). Most
of the increase between 2011 and 2012 was
concentrated in a handful of countries, such as
Bangladesh, the United Republic of Tanzania
and Zimbabwe, leaving 22 low income countries
with less aid to the sub-sector than in 2010. For
nine of these 22 countries, this was the second
consecutive annual decrease (Figure 7).
Figure 6: Aid to lower middle income countries fell the most mainly due
to large cuts to India
Total aid to basic education by country income group, 2010 and 2012
7
Unallocated by income
Upper middle
income countries
Constant 2012 US$ billions
6
1.0
5
0.6
4
3
2.3
0.8
Lower middle
income countries
0.7
Low income countries
1.8
2
1
2.0
1.9
2010
2012
0
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System (2014)
Policy Paper 13
As economies have grown over the past 15
years, the total number of low income countries
has fallen from 64 in 1999 to 36 in 2012. The
share of total aid to basic education for the 64
countries classified as low income in 1999 has
fallen from 71% in 2002 to 57% in 2012. The
share of total aid to basic education for the 36
countries currently classified as low income has
remained relatively constant but these countries
received only 37% of total aid to basic education
in 2012, which is low considering that these are
among those furthest from EFA.
Aid to basic education in lower middle income
countries decreased by 25% between 2010
and 2012 largely due to the heavy falls in
disbursements to India and Pakistan, but also in
Palestine and Viet Nam.
Decreasing levels of aid to education suggest
that donors may be questioning its importance.
Yet many low income countries still rely heavily
on aid to support their education systems.
While national spending still provides the
most important contribution, donor spending –
whether on or off budget – accounted for
approximately two-fifths of public spending
on education in countries such as Liberia,
Afghanistan and Malawi. In 12 countries, donors
fund a quarter or more of public spending on
education (Figure 8).
Current indications for the future of education
aid are also worrying. According to OECD
preliminary data, total aid increased by 6%
between 2012 and 2013 but aid is projected to
stagnate from 2014 onwards. The increase in
the medium term is expected to be primarily
for middle income countries in East, South and
Central Asia (such as China, India, Indonesia,
Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Uzbekistan and Viet Nam),
largely through concessional loans from
multilateral institutions and bilateral donors.
For many of the poorest countries, primarily
those in sub-Saharan Africa, the projections
point to a reduction in aid, of about US$500
million. Assuming that the share of total aid
allocated to education remains similar to the
share allocated since 2010, falls in overall
aid levels pose a considerable risk to the
possibility of reaching current and new global
education goals.
3
Policy Paper 13
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Humanitarian aid
Figure 7: Aid to basic education fell in 22 low income countries between
2010 and 2012
Total aid to basic education in low income countries, 2010 and 2012
316
247
Bangladesh
Burkina Faso
Nepal
Kenya
Zimbabwe
South Sudan
Myanmar
Somalia
Niger
Cambodia
Guinea
Kyrgyz Republic
Chad
Gambia
Aid to basic education
increased or remained the
same in 14 countries.
219
284
161
Afghanistan
Ethiopia
Tanzania
Mozambique
Malawi
D.R. Congo
Haiti
Mali
Uganda
Liberia
Benin
Rwanda
Tajikistan
Madagascar
Burundi
Sierra Leone
Eritrea
C.A.R.
Togo
Guinea-Bissau
Korea, Dem. Rep.
Comoros
2010
Aid to basic education
decreased in
22 countries.
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120 130
The following section considers trends in
humanitarian aid, looking at information
from the United Nations Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
process of consolidated appeals and flash
appeals (Box 1).
Humanitarian aid is vital to help
countries rebuild after crises
2012
0
Humanitarian aid is designed to save lives,
sustain access to vital services and alleviate
suffering both during and immediately after
emergencies. It is different from development
aid in that it is intended to be short-term; in
practice it is often difficult to decide when the
aftermath of an emergency ends and other
types of assistance begin.
140 150 350
Constant 2012 US$ millions
Half of the world’s out-of-school children
live in conflict-affected countries (2013/4 EFA
Global Monitoring Report). Many others live
in countries devastated by natural disasters.
These countries, which are the furthest offtrack in efforts to achieve EFA, urgently need
both long-term development assistance and
short-term humanitarian aid to overcome
their crises. Many have been subject to
a United Nations consolidated appeals
process for a number of years for an effective
humanitarian response.
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System (2014)
Figure 8: Aid is a major source of education funding for poor countries
Donor spending as a share of total public spending on education, 2012
Liberia
Afghanistan
Malawi
Comoros
Guinea-Bissau
Gambia
Burkina Faso
C.A.R.
Haiti
Mozambique
Cambodia
Sierra Leone
Uganda
Bangladesh
Nepal
Rwanda
Burundi
Niger
U.R. Tanzania
D.R. Congo
Benin
Ethiopia
Madagascar
Mali
Tajikistan
Togo
Kenya
Domestic spending
Donor spending
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Share of total public expenditure (%)
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System and Development Finance International (2014)
4
Policy Paper 13
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Box 1: Flash and consolidated appeals
Flash appeals are launched immediately
after a humanitarian disaster, based on early
assessments. Typically they cover funding for
three to six months. These are often meant
to assist countries that are not in long-term
conflict but have suffered from a catastrophic
natural disaster.
Consolidated appeals are the single largest
tools for raising humanitarian aid. They provide
a consolidated budget drawing on information
transmitted through national processes.
Consolidated appeals are typically directed
towards longer-term complex emergencies,
such as those in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo or Somalia.
Contrary to a common perception that
humanitarian aid acts as a short-term
gap filler, it often represents a large
share of aid. In 2012, humanitarian
aid made up 23% of external financing
in the 21 countries with consolidated
humanitarian appeals. In Somalia,
where a civil war has been going on
for over two decades, humanitarian aid
made over 60% of external financing in
2012 (Figure 9A).
However, humanitarian aid makes
up only a small share of the external
financing for education. In 2012,
humanitarian aid made up only 8%
of external financing for the sector
in the 21 countries that appealed for
humanitarian aid for education. In Niger,
where 45% of the country’s external
financing comes from humanitarian
aid, those funds made up only 5% of its
total external financing for education, as
education continues to be a low priority
in these appeals (Figure 9B).
Humanitarian aid appeals neglect
education needs
In 2011, the UN Secretary-General’s Global
Education First Initiative (GEFI) set a target for
education to receive at least 4% of short-term
humanitarian aid. As yet, the sector has not
come close to this target, receiving just 2% of
humanitarian appeals that were funded in 2013.
Although this is a small improvement on the
1.4% share recorded in 2012, it is still a long
way from the target (Figure 10). Education is
suffering a double disadvantage because it is
not only receiving the smallest proportion of
humanitarian appeals, but it is also receiving
one of the smallest proportions of the requests
that it makes for funding: in 2013 the sector
received 40% of what it had requested from
humanitarian aid. This compares with 86%
for the food sector and 57% for the health
sector (Figure 11).
Figure 9: Humanitarian aid is a significant form of financing for many
conflict-affected countries but less so for education
Share of humanitarian aid in total aid, selected countries and country
groups, 2012
Development
Humanitarian
A. Total aid
All developing
countries
5
All 21 appeal
countries
23
D.R. Congo
25
Niger
45
South Sudan
52
Somalia
62
0
20
40
60
80
100
Share of total aid (%)
B. Total aid to education
All developing
countries
2
All 21 appeal
countries
8
D.R. Congo
8
5
Niger
South Sudan
23
Somalia
27
0
20
40
60
80
100
Share in total aid to education (%)
Source: EFA Global Monitoring Report team analysis based on OECD Creditor Reporting System (2014)
and Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (2014)
5
Policy Paper 13
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Figure 10: Humanitarian funding peaked in 2010 but has since been on the decline
Consolidated and flash appeal requests and funding for the education sector, 2000–2013
600
5.0
4.7%
Unmet requirements
4.5
Funding received
4.0
Education’s share of funding (Right axis)
US$ millions
400
3.5
3.4%
3.2%
3.0
2.8%
300
2.4%
2.0%
2.2%
1.7%
200
1.1%
2.0
1.9%
1.6%
2.5
1.6%
1.5
1.4%
1.1%
1.0
Education as a share of total appeal funding (%)
500
100
0.5
0
0.0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Source: Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (2014)
Figure 11: Education receives a small share of humanitarian aid requests – and fewer of those requests get funded
Humanitarian aid consolidated appeals requests and funding by sector, 2013
100
Unmet requirements
2.0%
Funding received
2,500
86%
90
% of request funded (Right axis)
US$ millions
80
Education received 2.0%
of funding in 2013
74%
70
2,000
60
57%
1,500
50
46%
40%
40%
1,000
29%
40
31%
29%
30
Share of funding request met (%)
3,000
20
500
10
0
0
Food
Health
Coordination &
support services
Water &
sanitation
Shelter &
non-food items
Source: Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (2014)
When looking in detail at the 19 consolidated
humanitarian appeals made to the OCHA in
2013, only four of the 16 countries with requests
for education financing received funds equal
to 4% of humanitarian aid: Somalia (4%), the
Syrian Arab Republic (4%), Sudan (6%) and the
Central African Republic (8%) (Figure 12). In the
case of the Central African Republic, 81% of the
resources received for education were for school
feeding programmes.
Of the 28 consolidated humanitarian and
flash appeals to the OCHA in 2014, 13 have
proposed that 4% or more of total humanitarian
Agriculture
Protection
Education
Economic
recovery &
infrastructure
funds requested should be earmarked for the
education sector.
Unfortunately aid agencies often work in
parallel, meaning that many of the needs of the
education sector specific to a conflict setting
fall through the gaps. Mali is an example of
a conflict-affected country that has suffered
from this lack of coordination: its development
aid to education fell from US$136 million in
2008 to US$40 million in 2012, and only 6%
of its requests for education funding from
humanitarian aid were met in 2012, compared
with 61% of its requests for nutrition.
6
Policy Paper 13
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Figure 12: Conflict-affected countries received only a tiny share of their requests for humanitarian education funding in 2013
Consolidated appeal requests and funding for education, 2013
6%
100
1%
90
US$ millions
4%
4%
Unmet requirements
Of the total available
funds from the appeal,
just 1% was for the
education sector.
80
70
In the D.R. Congo, only
9% of requests for
the education sector
were met.
Funded
% of total humanitarian
funding to education
60
50
3%
40
3%
8%
1%
1%
30
1%
3%
20
0%
2%
0%
0%
1%
Philippines
Niger
Kenya
Mauritania
10
0
Syrian A.R.
Sudan
South Sudan Somalia
Palestine
C.A.R.
D.R. Congo
Mali
Yemen
Afghanistan
Burkina
Faso
Chad
Source: Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (2014)
Conclusion
As we showed in the 2013/4 EFA Global
Monitoring Report, many of the countries
furthest from the EFA goals do not sufficiently
tap their tax base or devote an adequate share
of their revenue to education. If countries raised
20% of their GDP in taxes – the level judged
necessary to reach the Millennium Development
Goals – and allocated at least 20% of their
budget to education, they could go a long way
towards bridging the education financing gap.
But many of the poorest countries will still need
education aid for some years to come. When
the Education for All goals were established in
2000, donors and governments promised that
“no countries seriously committed to education
for all will be thwarted in their achievement
of this goal by a lack of resources.” Not only
have donors failed to keep that pledge, but
now many are backing away from education
as a development priority. With 57 million
children of primary school age still out of
school and 250 million children not learning
the basics, it is crucial that donors recommit
themselves to education.
EFA Global Monitoring Report
c/o UNESCO
7, place de Fontenoy
75352 Paris 07 SP, France
Email: [email protected]
Tel: +33 (1) 45 68 10 36
Fax: +33 (1) 45 68 56 41
www.efareport.unesco.org
Developed by an independent
team and published by UNESCO,
the Education for All Global Monitoring
Report is an authoritative reference
that aims to inform, influence and
sustain genuine commitment towards
Education for All.
© UNESCO
2014/ED/EFA/MRT/PP/13 REV.
7