UNESCO Centre
A Political Economy Analysis        of Education in Nepal                          Dr Tejendra Pherali            Liverpoo...
1. ‘People’s War’ and Post-War               Turmoil Armed rebellion 1996 – 2006 – Causes largely located in the  grievan...
2. Society and Education Education is a ‘political act’ and schools are ‘caught up in a  nexus of other institutions—poli...
3. Impact of Conflict Political change – abolition of monarchy, increased  participation of historically repressed popula...
4. Political Economy Analysis ‘There is increasing blockages for effective reform at the  sectoral level (including for d...
5. Key Findings Macro Analysis –   Geopolitical factors and historical trends lock Nepal into a    permanent state of we...
6. Problem-based Analysis in the         Education Sector Decentralisation - Excessive centralisation remains a key  feat...
8. Conclusions DPs’ interests seem to be more on technical solutions (e.g.  access, quality, infrastructural development,...
‘If our aim is to produce a new stratum ofintellectuals … from a social group whichhas not traditionally developed theappr...
References Bourdieu, P. (1986) The forms of capital, In Richardson, J. E.   (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the...
UNESCO Centre
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

2012-06-21 Dr Tejendra Pherali presents at INCORE Summer School 2012

681 views
576 views

Published on

Presentation given at the Magee campus of the University of Ulster by Dr Tejendra Pherali, Senior Lecturer in Education Studies and Sociology in the Centre for Education and Early Childhood Studies LJMU, at a seminar entitled 'Education and Peacebuilding in Conflict Affected Situations' run by the UNESCO Centre for the INCORE Summer School 2012.

Uploaded with the permission of Dr Pherali.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
681
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

2012-06-21 Dr Tejendra Pherali presents at INCORE Summer School 2012

  1. 1. UNESCO Centre
  2. 2. A Political Economy Analysis of Education in Nepal Dr Tejendra Pherali Liverpool John Moores University
  3. 3. 1. ‘People’s War’ and Post-War Turmoil Armed rebellion 1996 – 2006 – Causes largely located in the grievances of marginalised people  Poverty level rose from 33% in 1976 -77 to 42% by 1995-96  Income level for top 10% of the people rose from 21% in 1980s to 35% by the mid-1990s, while the share of the bottom 40% shrank from 24% to 15% in the same period (Sharma, 2006: 1245).  Poverty reduction 1995/96 – 2003/4: Brahmin and Chhetri – 46%, Muslims – 6%, Hill Indigenous nationalities – 10% and Dalit – 21%  Communist popularity rose from 7.2% votes in 1959 to 39.51% in 1999 and 56.98% in 2008 Peace Accord - November 2006, elections for the Constituent Assembly in April 2008 - Maoist victory with 229/601 in the CA The CA dissolved on 27 May and new date for re-election - 22 November
  4. 4. 2. Society and Education Education is a ‘political act’ and schools are ‘caught up in a nexus of other institutions—political, economic, and cultural—that are basically unequal’ (Apple, 2004: 61) . Education amplifies social and ethnic divisions (Davies, 2005) – e.g. language, history and content Schools reflected social realities –discrimination against lower castes, females, ethnic minorities (Pherali, 2011)
  5. 5. 3. Impact of Conflict Political change – abolition of monarchy, increased participation of historically repressed populations in politics, gradual transformation of power structures Deformation of social structures – caste, gender and ethnicity-based relationships have been ruptured Notions of multiple nationalities and the rise of ethnicity- based identities superseding the idea of unified national identity Excessive politicisation and de-institutionalisation of learning environments in schools
  6. 6. 4. Political Economy Analysis ‘There is increasing blockages for effective reform at the sectoral level (including for delivery, planning and procurement) can be political and that technical solutions alone may not be enough.’ (Joint Donor Workshop, 2009) ‘PEA is concerned with the interaction of political and economic processes in society: the distribution of power and wealth between different groups and individuals, and the processes that create, sustain and transform these relationships over time.’ (OECD-DAC)
  7. 7. 5. Key Findings Macro Analysis –  Geopolitical factors and historical trends lock Nepal into a permanent state of weak governance  Social structures work against the pro-poor policies Sector Analysis –  Politicisation of the education system (e.g. teachers, SMCs, educational officers),  Corruption in school funds,  Teacher recruitment and redeployment,  Lack of accountability in general (Pherali et al, forthcoming, 2012)
  8. 8. 6. Problem-based Analysis in the Education Sector Decentralisation - Excessive centralisation remains a key feature of governance, inhibiting local engagement and control  Centrally imposed policy without necessary support for local groups – neoliberal agenda  Political patronage based on political affiliation and weak governance  Economic motivations due to poverty – e.g. CSSP Public-private divide – education in mother tongue policy Technical and vocational education – peacebuilding by pacifying youth from marginalised communities Confusions about federalism
  9. 9. 8. Conclusions DPs’ interests seem to be more on technical solutions (e.g. access, quality, infrastructural development, teacher training, etc.) rather than engaging with more deeply- rooted problems in education (e.g. social and political exclusion, caste-based, ethnic and gender discrimination, linguistic repression, etc.). Increased development aid without structural reforms only benefits politically dominant social groups Education has received very little attention in the peace process and post-war peacebuilding strategies
  10. 10. ‘If our aim is to produce a new stratum ofintellectuals … from a social group whichhas not traditionally developed theappropriate attitudes, then we haveunprecedented difficulties to overcome’Gramsci (1971: 43).
  11. 11. References Bourdieu, P. (1986) The forms of capital, In Richardson, J. E. (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education, Westport, Greenwood Press. Davies, L. (2004) Education and conflict: Complexity and chaos, London: RoutledgeFalmer. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. London: Lawrence and Wishart. Pherali, T. J.(2011) Education and conflict in Nepal: Possibilities for reconstruction, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9, 135 - 154. Pherali, T. J., Smith, A. and Vaux, T. (forthcoming, 2012) A political economy analysis of education in Nepal, Brussels: European Union.
  12. 12. UNESCO Centre

×