Copyright CSEND 2003
Accreditation and Quality Assurance in Humanities and Social SciencesSwiss Academy of Humanities and Social SciencesBerne, 29th April, 2004
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and Higher Education
Dr. Raymond Saner CSEND, www.csend.org
© CSEND, 2003
Objectives of presentation:
1. GATS/ES: what it is and what it is not2. How GATS/ES is being negotiated3. Solutions for GATS/ES within/without GATS context4. Threats & Opportunities for Swiss
higher education
© CSEND, 2003
CSEND/Saner
CSEND/NGRDO, founded 1993, Geneva5 staff (Research & Development)Lecturer, WWZ-Uni Basle, since 1988Member Peer Review I & II: HES/CHSwiss member WG4: ISO 10015 TrainingMember Swiss delegation: OECD Fora on GATS/ES 2002, 2003Publications on GATS/ES, WTO, PRSP, QAMember of SNV since 1994
© CSEND, 2003
GATS & Globalisation(Source: W. Goode, 1998)
Globalisation: growing tertiary sector (services) of world economy: Example: Australia
A) 80% of total jobsB) 75% of GDPC) 13% Exports of ES of total Trade
in ServicesD) ES Exporters are mostly public
universities!
© CSEND, 2003
GATS/ES: Historical Perspective
1. 1947: GATT 18 members
2. 1966: Swiss membership
3. 1986-1994 UR4. 1995: WTO (110
membersa) GATT
(goods)b)
GATS(services)c) TRIPS (Ips)
5. GATS (12 sectors and 160 subsectors6. GATS/ES
a) 5 subsectorsb) 30 Bio US$
7. 2001- ? Doha Round (148 members)
© CSEND, 2003
GATS: purpose and objectives
(GATS) is a multilaterally agreed framework agreement for the trade in services which applies to all 148 WTO Members.
Three main objectives: 1. To progressively liberalise trade in services through successive
rounds of negotiations which should aim at promoting the interests of all members of the WTO and achieving an overall balance of rights and obligations.
2. To encourage economic growth and development thought liberalisation of trade in services, as the GATT does through the liberalisation of trade in goods;
3. to increase the participations of developing countries in world trade in services and expand their services exports by developing their export capacity and securing export opportunities in sectors of export interest to them.
© CSEND, 2003
WTO/GATS Rules
Most Favoured Nation Clause (MFN)No discrimination (Market Access/National Treatment)Binding commitmentsTransparency (Notifications)
© CSEND, 2003
Typology of Existing Barriers to Trade in ES (identified by USA, New Zealand, Australia and Japan)
M1 Prohibition for foreign providers
No possibility for foreign supplier to offer its services (all modes of supply).
M2 Administrative burden and lack of transparency
Domestic laws and regulations unclear and administered in unfair manner (all modes of supply);When governmental approval required for foreign suppliers, extremely long delays encountered; when approval denied, no explication given, no information about necessary improvements to obtain it in the future (all modes of supply);Denial of permission for private sector suppliers to enter into and exit from joint ventures with local or non-local partners on a voluntary basis (Modes 1 &3).
Barriers to Trade Examples
Source: Saner & Fasel, 2003, „Negotiating Trade in Educational Services within the WTOGATS Context“
© CSEND, 2003
Typology of Existing Barriers to Trade in ES (identified by USA, New Zealand, Australia and
Japan) - 2
M3 Fiscal discrimination
Subsidies for education are not made known in a clear and transparent manner (all modes of supply);Repatriation of earnings is subject to excessively costly fees and/or taxes for currency conversion (all modes of supply);Excessive fees/taxes imposed on licensing or royalty payments (Modes 1 and 3).
M4 Accreditation/recognition discrimination
No recognition of degrees/titles delivered by foreign providers (all modes of supply);No recognition of foreign diplomas (Mode 2);No accreditation delivered nationally for foreign providers (Modes 1 and 3).
Barriers to Trade Examples
Source: Saner & Fasel, 2003, „Negotiating Trade in Educational Services within the WTOGATS Context“
© CSEND, 2003
Modes of Supply in GATS/ES
Source: OECD/CERI, 2002
© CSEND, 2003
Table 3. Design of GATS Schedules
Modes of supply:
(1) Cross-border supply (2) Consumption supply (3) Commercial presence (4) Presence of natural persons
I. HORIZONTAL COMMITMENTS
All sectors
Limitations on market access(Art. XVI)
Limitations on national treatment(Art. XVII)
Additional commitments
Mode 1Mode 2Mode 3Mode 4
Mode 1Mode 2Mode 3Mode 4
II. SECTOR-SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS
Sector or sub-sector
1. Primary Education2. Secondary
Education3. Higher Education4. Adult Education5. Other
Limitations on market access(Art. XVI)
Limitations on national treatment(Art. XVII)
Additional commitments
Mode 1Mode 2Mode 3Mode 4
Mode 1Mode 2Mode 3Mode 4
e.g. procurement, pre-commitment to future liberalisation
© CSEND, 2003
Schedule Pre-Doha: USACountry Sub-
sectorCross-border supply
Consumption Abroad
Commercial Presence Presence of natural persons
USA Adult (except flying instruc-tion)
MA: None
NT: Scholar-ships and grants may be limited to US citizens and/
or residents of particular states and may, in some cases, only be used at certain states institutions or within certain US jurisdic-tions.
MA: None
NT: Scholar-ships and grants may be limited to US citizens and/ or residents of particular states and may, in some cases, only be used at certain state institutions or within certain US jurisdic-tions.
MA: The number of licences for cosmeto-logy schools in Kentucky is limited to 48 total licences, with a total of 8 licences allowed for operation of such schools per congressional district.
NT: Scholarships and grants may be limited to US citizens and/or residents of particular states and may, in some cases, only be used at certain state institutions or within certain US jurisdictions.
MA: Unbound except as indicated in the horizon-tal section
NT: Scholar-ships and grants may be limited to US citizens and/ or residents of particular states and may, in some cases, only be used at certain state institutions or within certain US jurisdic-tions.
© CSEND, 2003
Schedule pre-Doha: AustraliaCountry Sub-sector Cross-border
supplyConsumption Abroad
Commercial Presence
Presence of natural persons
Australia Secondary (covers general as well as tech-nical and voca-tional education at the secondary level in private institutions)
MA: None
NT: None
MA: None
NT: None
MA: None
NT: Unbound
MA: Unbound except as indi-cated in the hori-zontal section.
NT: Unbound except as indi-cated in the hori-zontal sectionHigher (covers
provisions of private tertiary education servi-ces including at university level)
Other (covers English language tuition)
© CSEND, 2003
Schedule pre-Doha: Norway
Country Sub-sector Cross-border supply
Consump-tion Abroad
Commer-cial Presence
Presence of natural persons
Norway Education-al services leading to the confer-ing of State recognized exams and/ or degrees
Education-al services not leading to the con-ferring of State re-cognized exams and/ or degrees
Primary MA: As mode 3NT: None
MA: None
NT: None
MA: Primary & second-ary
NT: None
MA: Unbound except as indicated in the horizontal section
NT: Unbound except as indicated in the horizon-tal section. Teaching qua-lifications from abroad may be recognized, and an exam must be passed.
Secondary (lower & upper)
Higher
Adult
Primary MA: None
NT: NoneMA: None
NT: None
MA: None
NT: None
MA: Unbound except as indicated in the horizontal section.
NT: Unbound except as indicated in the horizontal section
Secondary (lower & upper)
Higher
Adult
© CSEND, 2003
Schedule pre Doha: Switzerland
Country Sub-sector Cross-border supply
Consump-tion Abroad
Commer-cial Presence
Presence of natural persons
Switzer-land
Private Educa-tional Services
Primary MA: Unbound
NT: Unbound
MA: Unbound
NT: UnboundMA: None
NT: NoneMA: Unbound
NT: UnboundSecondary
(Compulsory)
Secondary
(Non-Com-pulsory)
MA: None
NT: NoneMA: None
NT: None
MA: None
NT: NoneMA: Unbound except as indi-cated in the horizontal sec-tion.
NT: Unbound except as indi-cated in the horizontal sec-tion
Higher
Adult
© CSEND, 2003
National Treatment Commitments in H.E. By Mode, No. Of Country Commitments
Source: OECD/CERI, 2002
© CSEND, 2003
Market Access Commitments in H.E. By Mode, No. Of Country Commitments
© CSEND, 2003
35 Initial ES Requests by November 2003
Not public, only offers will be (MFN)Made public so far:
Canada: no Rs on health, education, social service, cultureSwitzerland, no Rs on educationEU on USA only: HE to make commitments in modes 1, 2 and 3 for privately funded educational services and in mode 4 to commit for privately funded educational services as referred to in the section “horizontal commitments”. New Zealand and Norway: made initial RQs on ES
© CSEND, 2003
ES & Globalisatin: Two realities
Within GATS/ES contextA) souvereign right of each country to make or not make commitments B) souvereing right to difine what „public service“ should beC) souvereign right to engage in Request/Offer in ES or not
Outside GATS/ES contextA) Internationalisation of higher education happens independent of GATS/ESB) Danger of „Degree mills“ C) Students (Parents) vote with their feet
© CSEND, 2003
Solutin sets to trade in education
Structural Solutions1. Within GATS/ES
• Example: by profession (GATS/Accountants)• Plurilateral Agreeement (like Public Procurement)2. Outside GATS/ES• Example: UNESCO/OECD WG on quality assurance,
recognition of degress, professional standards
Functional Solutions (within GATS)1. Social knowledge (like TK/TRIPS)
2. Multi-developmental ES (like multifunctional agriculture)
© CSEND, 2003
Alternatives for ES
GATS/ES is not of the devil! (e.g. does not require privatisation of ES).GATS/ES is one but important option to develop, open and participate in global education marketGATS/ES is as good as the strategy of WTO member countries allow, if there is one at all?IF „Niet“ to GATS/ES: WHAT IS THE ALETRNATIVE FOR THE FUTURE?
© CSEND, 2003
5 Major Exporters of ES, US$ million and as a % of total exports in Services
© CSEND, 2003
Ratio of Foreign Students per Domestic Students Abroad in Tertiary Education
Source: OECD/CERI, 2002
© CSEND, 2003
Example of China’s Education Strategy and Use of GATS/ES
Shanghai • 15 million people• public schools• competitive exams
Private school suburb
Private school suburb
Private school province
Private school suburb
© CSEND, 2003
Example of China’s Education Strategy and Use of GATS/ES
Tuition fee (maximum)
Qualification criteria of teachers
Regulatory requirements
Top grade allowance
Required entry points (minimum & maximum specifications)
Tuition fee (minimum)
Location of school
Shanghai • 15 million people• public schools• competitive exams
AUSTRALIA e.g. Sydney University
- graduate degrees (MBA, Ph.D.)- immigration/ work permit/ possible citizenship - opportunities for wealth creation- remittence/ FDI to China- return to China
© CSEND, 2003
Example: USA 2004 (post 9/11)
(Source: Robert Gates, IHT, 3th April 2004)
Impact of 9/11 related security measures:1. Application for HE fall 2004/USA:
1. Chinese: 76% reduction2. Indians: 58 % reduction2. Application to Research Universities
38% drop compared to 2003
Negative Impact:
Lower income for US universitiesLower rate of innovation for US universities & R&D InstitutesInsufficient US students for key fields: engineering, ITReduction of PR Image impact on rest of world (US way of life)
© CSEND, 2003
ES: Strategic considerations
How to ensure innovation of teaching methods & research capabilities of Swiss universities and HES?How to ensure exchange with „rest of the world“ in matters pertaining to ES & R&D?How to ensure participation of Swiss academics in knowledge creation at global levels?How to ensure recognition of Swiss degress, professional qualifications, quality standardsHow to ensure adequate supply of highly educated persons for all vital sectors of Swiss economy and society now and in future?How to ensure equality of access to ES for all Swiss potential students?How to ensure cost efficient & learning effective higher education in Switzerland?
© CSEND, 2003
Données statistiques disponibles sur "l'internationalisation de la formation
supérieure en Suisse Rapport final, OCDE GATS/ES forum, Trondheim 2003
Fourniture transfrontalière
Fourniture transfrontalière
Fourniture transfrontalière
Fourniture transfrontalière
IN Etudiants étrangers suivant des offres de formation à distance fournies par les universités suisses : pas de données, offre peu importante
Etudiants étrangers suivant des offres de formation à distance fournies par les universités suisses : pas de données, offre peu importante
Etudiants étrangers suivant des offres de formation à distance fournies par les universités suisses : pas de données, offre peu importante
Etudiants étrangers suivant des offres de formation à distance fournies par les universités suisses : pas de données, offre peu importante
OUT Etudiants suisses suivant des cours à distance fournis par une université étrangère : pas de données
Etudiants suisses suivant des cours à distance fournis par une université étrangère : pas de données
Etudiants suisses suivant des cours à distance fournis par une université étrangère : pas de données
Etudiants suisses suivant des cours à distance fournis par une université étrangère : pas de données
© CSEND, 2003
What approach- What Philosophy?
1. Rational-Deductive-Normative Model
• Mandatory accreditation scheme at national level, based on
national laws
•Mandatory QA systems as part of accreditation scheme within each
school or university
•Mandatory regulation of recognition of qualifications within accreditation schemes based
on national laws
Plus
logical-deductive – rational-transparent (law)
equal-level-playing field at national level for all schools and universities
Minus
bureaucratic, costly, lenghty, stiffling innovation protectionist (trade barrier)
© CSEND, 2003
What approach- What Philosophy? Cont.
3. Pragmatic-Emerging Model
• No overarching mandatory accreditation system at national level. Schools & Universities free to select
national or foreign accreditation systems- or none at all
• Selection of QA system left to schools and universities
• But Recognition of Qualifications regulated by
governments exerting upward pressure to ensure minimum
QA-standards
Plus
ensures minimum performance levels (Rec. - Qualifications)
leaves open space for innovation
Minus tension between Rec.-Qualification at national level vs at international level
Possible “take over” by foreign Accreditation & QA schemes
© CSEND, 2003
What approach- What Philosophy? Cont.
2. Decentralised-Deregulated- “Market” Model
Plus easy to position and re-position schools & universities at national and international level
non-protectionist but possibly influenced by industry-cartels dominant schools and universities
Minus possible race to the bottom: low cost-low quality-low equity
elitist split (“excellent” and “lousy” schools and universities)
• No mandatory QA system at schools and universities
• No recognition of qualifications at national level
• No accreditation law nor mandatory practice at national level
Copyright CSEND 2003
Thank you for your attention