Education Systems in South Asia

Implications of Globalization and Economic Reforms

Baela Jamil, Manzoor Ahmed, and Sakar Pudasaini

ContentsIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2The Meaning and Characteristics of Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Globalization: Old and New . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Globalization’s Many Faces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Critiques of Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Manifestations of Globalization Affecting Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Globalization and Inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Migrant Workers and Remittances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Regional Integration in South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Dealing with It: Promising Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Harnessing Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13SDG 2030: The Global Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16SDG 4: The Education Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

A Response Framework for South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Civil Society Activism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

AbstractHome to almost a quarter of humanity, South Asia is marked by diversityof cultures, geography, and economies. Comprising mostly of middle- and

B. Jamil (*)Program and Policy, Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi, Lahore, Pakistane-mail: itacec@gmail.com

M. AhmedBRAC Institute of Educational Development (BIED), BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladeshe-mail: amahmed40@yahoo.com

S. PudasainiKarkhana, Kathmandu, Nepale-mail: sakarp@gmail.com

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020P. M. Sarangapani, R. Pappu (eds.), Handbook of Education Systems in South Asia,Global Education Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3309-5_19-1

1

lower-middle-income countries, there are similarities as well as unique featuresin problems of education and development faced by them. They have respondedin multiple, sometimes contrasting, ways to the influence of globalization and infacing up to the challenges of the twenty-first century.

Buffeted by diverse forces, such as climate change and dangers of interna-tional terrorism, there is a new level of awareness today in the world includingthe region about common risks and dangers to humankind which demand col-lective and global response. A manifestation of this awareness is the formulationof the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, to be achieved by 2030.The globalization context and the fast pace of economic growth in the regionpresent both new challenges and opportunities. The flow of remittances from theglobal North to global South, and increasingly intraregion, for example, offersbetter educational choices for families. Another example is the potentials andchallenges of educational application of digital technology, which is inextricablylinked to globalization and economic change.

SDG 4, the overarching education goal, demands universal and inclusiveparticipation in quality education up to the secondary level by 2030. Yet, overat least 11 million primary-age and almost 21 million lower secondary-agechildren in South Asia are not even in school, by recent UIS estimate. Civilsociety, nongovernmental organizations, and governments need to work togetherwith a shared vision to improve the state of education.

We suggest that the discussion of globalization issues and their implicationsfor education and human resource development lends support to the propositionthat quality, equity, and inclusion in education are the critical themes in theexploration of objectives, strategies, and how these can be effectively pursuedin educational development in South Asia.

KeywordsGlobalization · Educational response to globalization · Regional integration ·Sustainable Development Goals · Inclusive education · Quality education ·Inequality · Education technology

Introduction

Home to a fifth of mankind, and almost half of the world’s poor people, South Asia isa region of great diversity, contrasts, and challenges. History and geography bind thecountries and the people in the region together and offer potential for shareddevelopment and common benefits. As the character and prospects of globalizationare examined, it is pertinent to look at whether and how the region – the countriesand the people of South Asia – can be better integrated within the broader context ofglobalization and forge a better future for their people.

South Asia includes three out of the nine most populous countries of the world(Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan), two islands (Sri Lanka and Maldives), and threelandlocked countries (Bhutan, Nepal, and Afghanistan).

2 B. Jamil et al.

The 2018 UNDP Human Development Index (composite of life expectancy,education, and income per capita) places the South Asian countries in a ranking of189 countries of the world at the low end of the scale (with the exception of SriLanka). Sri Lanka has a rank of 76, while it ranges from 101 to 168 for the otherseven countries (Table 1).

The HDI metrics, however, mask positive economic growth outlook for the SouthAsian region pushed by market-driven economic regimes over the last three decades.According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank, prospectsremain robust for South Asia, as the “new face of emerging economies,” at growthrates of around 7% (Seth 2019), among the highest in the world.

With more than 50% population under 30 years of age, the region’s demographypresents a high potential to sustain economic growth if supported by qualitylearning opportunities, backed by technology and communication initiatives, andundergirded by commitment to the principles of equity and inclusion.

It is against such a backdrop of diversity and potential that we consider theimplications of globalization and economic reforms for the education systems ofSouth Asia. The complex and wide-ranging subject can be approached in differentways, and there can be genuine differences in views about what may be highlightedin a brief chapter. We have chosen to emphasize four aspects of the issues ofglobalization and the educational implications:

(a) The meaning and characteristics of globalization(b) Manifestations of globalization affecting human resource development(c) Dealing with it – promising initiatives(d) SDG 4 as a response framework

The Meaning and Characteristics of Globalization

In this section, the evolution of the concept of globalization and its various dimen-sions are discussed, keeping in view the impact and implications for education andhuman resource development.

Table 1 HDI ranking of South Asian countries, 2018

Country HDI rank among 189 countries

Sri Lanka 76

Maldives 101

India 130

Bhutan 134

Bangladesh 136

Nepal 149

Pakistan 150

Afghanistan 168

Source: UNDP, Human Development Report (2018)

Education Systems in South Asia 3

Globalization: Old and New

Humankind started its march out of Africa and across the globe 50,000 years ago.Trade routes like the Silk Road were charted out around the globe in the middle ages.Peoples’ faith and ideas like Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam spread throughoutthe planet over centuries.

In recent decades, technological change continued to reduce the cost of transpor-tation of goods and people, and the Internet gave rise to massive instant communi-cation. All these created what Thomas Friedman calls a flat world. Trade, capitalflows, and migration continue to accelerate. We are yet to reach one fully integratedglobal community, but the journey continues sometimes haltingly, but inexorably(Friedman 2005).

The global economy has been considered a source of prosperity and povertyreduction. But financial crises, income disparities, environmental degradation, andinternational and national economic corruption have gone hand in hand. There arewinners and losers in various dimensions of globalization. They pose new questionsof fairness, equity, and justice. There are difficult challenges, including those ineducation, about how globalization can be managed optimally for the benefitof humankind and the planet. As British Sociologist Anthony Giddens put it,“The debate now is about the consequences of globalization, not about the realityof globalization.” (Giddens 2000).

Globalization’s Many Faces

Economic globalization: In a generic sense, globalization is the increasing inter-connectedness and interdependency of the world’s nations and their people in asingle global, economic, political, and global system. The economic aspects ofglobalization have become prominent in recent decades as reflected in the globalexpansion of capitalism, free markets, and the increase in international trade. Thenetworks of production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services areincreasingly stretched across the globe. The making of the physical products maybe done in the less developed countries, whereas the branding and marketing withincreased value addition are done in the advanced countries. Many countries haveadopted neoliberal economic policies characterized by free market with deregulation– removing restrictions on businesses, e.g., reducing health and safety regulationsand labor rights, and less government restrictions as the formula for economicgrowth and prosperity.

Cultural globalization: Cultural globalization refers to the movement of ideas,attitudes, meanings, values, and cultural products across national borders. Oneaspect of political globalization (see below) is the spread of democratic values andculture and the evolution of a regime of international institutions, rules, and practicesto facilitate and promote economic and political interaction among countries.

Ways of reconciling tradition and change are a part of cultural globalization withpeople questioning traditional ways of life and beliefs about religion, family life,

4 B. Jamil et al.

marriage, gender roles, and so on. Increasingly, people’s identities are shapedthrough picking and mixing from different cultural traditions around the globe.Many people in developing countries including South Asia are selecting andadopting western cultural norms and practices.

The results, on the one hand, are erosion of local cultural tradition, a homogeni-zation of culture, and the emergence of a global monoculture. This is symbolized bywhat is called McDonaldization – the spread of McDonalds’ chain of fast-foodrestaurants throughout the world representing the increasing corporate marketingof standardized products, a cookie-cutter approach to shaping people’s tastes andthe preference for an Americanized lifestyle (Ritzer 2008). At the same time, therise of “hijab” culture as a counter narrative for identity, culture, and fashion (Kuriata2016) is not just a rising trend across South Asian countries but also amongsignificant well-assimilated migrant communities in the West (the UK, France,Germany, the USA, etc.).

Cosmopolitanism is a feature of cultural globalization in which people andsocieties are more tolerant of each other’s ways of life and values as they increas-ingly come into contact, enter into dialogue with diverse cultures, and find waysto “live together.” Cosmopolitanism is the opposite of fundamentalism in beliefs andattitudes (Appiah 2006). It is in these culturally rich learning spaces that South Asiaoffers promise of collaboration and cooperation for human development.

Political globalization: Political globalization, on the one hand, is manifested inthe growing acceptance of democracy as the norm of organizing the business of thestate and the government; on the other hand, it is manifested in demand for lessgovernment and state intervention in the economy. Political globalization also raisesquestions about the changing role of the nation state. Traditionally, nation states andnational governments have been exclusively responsible for the welfare of theircitizens. Since the end of the Second World War and the creation of the UnitedNations in 1945, international charters and conventions regarding human rights,including civil, political, and economic rights, and normative principles for conductamong nations and peoples have emerged. The emerging global political ideals thusset some limits on the freedom of governments to shape domestic policies (White2006).

Political globalization is thus characterized by the growth of international andregional mechanisms of governance such as the United Nations, the World Bank, theInternational Court of Justice, the World Trade Organization, and the regional bodiessuch as the European Union, ASEAN, and SAARC. The governments of nationstates are expected to be guided by international agreements and norms emanatingfrom these international bodies. A network of governance – without a government –has been created at the global and regional levels operating at varying degrees ofefficacy and influence.

International and national civil society role. Parallel to the intergovernmentalbodies including the UN system and regional bodies, the international non-governmental organizations such as OXFAM, Save the Children, Greenpeace, andPlan International operate in dozens of countries, and their members have aninternational outlook, objectives, and agenda combining funding with service

Education Systems in South Asia 5

delivery through partnerships. More significantly globalization for human develop-ment is manifested through international funding institutions both multilateral (UNbodies, World Bank, ADB) and bilateral (UK AID, EU, Canada, USAID, UAE,China Aid) as well as the new philanthropic and financing foundations (Bill &Melinda Gates, Open Society, Dubai Cares, Qatar, Google, Hewlett Foundation,Master Card Foundation, to name a few.)

Critiques of Globalization

There are critiques of globalization which look upon it as hardly an unmixedblessing. These critical views have special relevance for South Asia, with its largeconcentration of the world’s poor and the unrealized potential for development.

Ha-Joon Chang, the Cambridge University economist, for instance, argues thatneoliberal policies, the linchpin of economic globalization, primarily benefit wealthycountries and harm developing countries. He refers to the WTO, World Bank, andIMF, the high temples of economic globalization, as the “unholy trinity.” Chang,among others, argues that an objective historical perspective does not supportthe uncritical hype about free trade and that there is an urgent need for rethinkingsome key conventional wisdom in the debate on trade policy and more broadly onglobalization (Chang 2003).

In Chang’s reasoning, the conventional story about free trade and economicglobalization is basically incomplete and misleading. In the developing world,economic growth had been faltering except in East and Southeast Asian countries,which pursued “good” policies (of free market and free trade) and are credited withcreating the Asian miracle. What remains unexplained is the economic implosion ofthe early 1980s in several of the “miracle” countries and the financial market crisis ofa wider scale in 2008. These episodes exposed the limitations of the neoliberal policyreforms in the direction of globalization. The history of the faltering progress of freetrade and its role in economic globalization suggest that it is necessary to take seriousnote of Chang’s argument (Chang 2002).

Jeremy Seabrook, a British writer and social activist, sees globalization as a“declaration of war” upon local cultures as the expansion of western culture engulfsthe world and destroys local cultures. Seabrook makes a distinction between glob-alization and internationalism. He argues that the idea of a rapacious globalizationaiming for the absorption of all the countries of the world into a single economicentity has eclipsed and usurped internationalism, masquerading as if these were thesame thing.

“A triumphal global capitalism requires . . . the humiliation of hundreds ofmillions of people for the sake of being competitive in the world—to offer theirlabour at less than subsistence rates in the Dutch auction of a global labour market,whereby planeloads of desperate and terrified Bangladeshi peasants must be trans-ferred to Laos to build a luxury hotel, where thousands of country-women fromIndonesia are air-borne to Saudi Arabia as virtual captive domestic labour, where

6 B. Jamil et al.

young girls from Yunnan in South China are trafficked to the brothels ofBangkok. . .,” writes Seabrook (1996).

Internationalists like Seabrook speak of another benign form of integration,“more harmonious, less violent, more just” with dignity, sufficiency, and securityof people when the powerless unite, and the disadvantaged combine to “makecommon cause against what William Morris 100 years ago referred to as the ironrule of the World-Market” (Ibid.).

Amartya Sen, the Economics Nobel laureate, the protagonist of the social choicetheory in economics, takes a pragmatic view of globalization. For Sen, globalizationis neither particularly new nor a folly. The problem, to Sen, is not free trade, but theinequality of global power. He welcomes the rise of the NGO movement and theirpotential as a countervailing force to the transnational corporations and the tradi-tional policies of richer countries.

Sen is critical of developing country governments for not undertaking necessarydomestic reforms to serve the well-being of their people. He also argues that theUnited Nations, the iconic expression of globalism, has to be rescued from perma-nent insolvency and impotence arising from the asymmetry of the veto power of thefive richest countries.

Fair sharing of the global opportunities is the ultimate question for Sen.“The central issue of contention is not globalization itself, nor is it the use of themarket as an institution, but the inequity in the overall balance of institutionalarrangements which produces very unequal sharing of the benefits of globalization.”International institutional arrangements have to be reformed – in addition to nationalones – in order to overcome both the errors of omission and those of commission thatlimit the opportunities for the poor across the world, argues Sen. “Globalizationdeserves a reasoned defense, but it also needs reform” (Sen 2002).

Another Economics Nobel winner, Joseph Stiglitz, argues in line with Sen thateconomic globalization has surpassed political globalization. Inequality has turnedout to be an important consequence of globalization. Pharmaceutical companies, forexample, use intellectual property to prevent distribution of even lifesaving productsaround the world and fail to conduct research on diseases that affect large numbers ofpeople in developing countries. Stiglitz proposes corrective measures by govern-ments including incentives to research that protects and improves the lives of people(see further discussion below.) Stiglitz also argues that protecting the environmentas a critical global issue has not been given due attention in economic globalizationdiscourse, though countries must work together to lessen the effects of globalwarming (Stiglitz 2006).

Manifestations of Globalization Affecting Human ResourceDevelopment

In this section, globalization’s impact on inequality, the migrant workers’ phenom-enon, and regional economic integration challenges in South Asia as complexmanifestations of globalization with varying consequences are discussed.

Education Systems in South Asia 7

Globalization and Inequality

Extreme economic inequality is corrosive for people and societies. High inequalityprevents poverty reduction, hurts economies, and creates social unrest, conflict,and violence. Eighty-two percent of the wealth generated in 2017 went to the richest1% of the global population, while half of humanity, 3.7 billion people, a largeproportion of them living on less than 2 dollars a day, had no improvement in theireconomic situation, according to the Oxfam report Reward Work, Not Wealth(Oxfam 2018).

Winnie Byanyima, head of Oxfam, said: “The billionaire boom is not a sign of athriving economy but a symptom of a failing economic system. The people whomake our clothes, assemble our phones and grow our food are being exploited toensure a steady supply of cheap goods, and swell the profits of corporationsand billionaire investor.” Moreover, women workers are the bottom of the heapacross the world consistently earning less than men and are engaged in the leastsecure forms of work. It is not accidental that nine out of ten billionaires are men(Oxfam 2018).

Economist E.F. Schumacher, who wrote in 1973 the seminal book SmallIs Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, promotes what he calls“Buddhist economics,” prioritizing people over products and creativity overconsumption. He argues that humanity needs an economics that takes into accountethics and the environment and creates wealth for all people, not just money for theprivileged few and large corporations (Schumacher 1973; Galasso and Wood 2015).

The path to a more equal and just world calls for international and global action aswell as national measures which have been identified by protagonists such as Oxfamand through study and analysis of researchers. These include collaborative action atthe international level and international support and encouragement for appropriatenational action. Such actions, among others, are checking illicit outflows of wealth,progressive income tax, and tax justice, agreement on a global wealth tax asproposed by Thomas Piketty, ensuring living wage for workers and their right toorganize, and transparent and democratic international trade policy (Galasso andWood 2015; Piketty 2014; Milanovic 2016).

Even if the effects of globalization, economic liberalization and market growth,are positive among segments of the population in the urban sectors and areas, mostof the rural areas are not significant beneficiaries. In examining the mechanisms andthe impacts of globalization upon inequality, research suggests that globalizationfactors are combined with technological change as well as institutional arrangementsto generate higher inequality (Chusseau and Hellier 2012).

Cross-country evidence from household survey-based data shows that at very lowlevels of GDP per capita, free trade and open economies reduce the share of thepoorest 70% of the population and increase the share of the top two deciles. Theinequality-inducing effect is lessened as GDP per capita increases and reaches aturning point around the income levels of Spain and Israel (Milanovic 2012). Butmore recent trend, as noted by Oxfam and Thomas Piketty, appears to contradict thisconclusion.

8 B. Jamil et al.

An explanation of how the effects of globalization and related factors playout negatively for the already poor was suggested by Winters et al. (2004). Ifglobalization-related economic reform boosts demand for labor-intensive products,it boosts the demand for labor, and wages will increase. However, if the poor aremostly in completely unskilled families, even if overall poverty is unaffected,inequality would increase.

Migrant Workers and Remittances

An important element of globalization is the growth in the movement of migrantworkers across countries and its effects on household income and welfare, contri-bution to national GDP, and foreign exchange balance. All of these have implicationsfor education, skills development, and human well-being.

There are about 200 million migrants from low- and middle-income countries,who send money to their families back home. Taking family members into account,at least a billion people, one in seven of the world’s population, are involved insending or receiving remittances. Total earnings of migrant workers are estimatedto be about US$3 trillion annually, of which 85% remain in the sending countries.Remittances overwhelmingly are from high-income to low-income countries(North-South), though this could reflect to some extent the paucity of data onSouth-South migrant workers (IFAD 2017).

Push and pull factors: One finds both push and pull factors that drive the globalgrowth of migrant labor. Developed countries have two major pull factors. First, theyhave aging populations and need immigrant labor to fill many jobs in importantsectors to keep their economies running. Developed countries often also need laborto work in sectors that the local citizenry are not keen on. Construction, agriculture,energy, hospitality, child and elder care, and general maintenance sectors in theindustrialized developed and the small-population oil-rich countries are dependenton migrant workers.

In low- and lower-middle-income countries, high youth unemployment rates,which can be more than twice the average national rates, are a major push factor.Limited opportunities in the local job market as well as income inequality are “push”factors for potential migrant workers.

Global remittances to developing countries increased by 51% between 2007 and2016, while the number of migrants from these same countries increased by 28%.The trend is of growing numbers of migrant workers and increased amounts ofremittances. It is estimated that worldwide, between 2015 and 2030, US$6.5 trillionin remittances will be sent to low-and middle-income countries. While the overalltrend of remittances and migrant labor may be upward, individual country because ofthe kind of labor they provide might have to contend with the consequences ofslowing down remittances. This will be a severe challenge to economies such as thatof Nepal. Education systems should take this risk into account.

Impact of remittances: Remittances have had tremendous impact on poverty,women’s empowerment, and basic services. Women now comprise about half of

Education Systems in South Asia 9

all remittance senders (100 million), contributing to gender equality and women’sempowerment. With about three-quarters of remittances spent on basic needs (food,shelter, clothing, education, health care, and utilities), regular remittances help liftfamilies above the poverty line. Remittances account for more than three times thecombined official development assistance from all sources, as well as more than thetotal of foreign direct investment to almost every low- and middle-income country(Ibid.). Remittances have accelerated the urbanization of families and are a signif-icant source of private funding of education, including the rise of lower-cost privateschools in urban South Asia (Table 2).

Table 2 shows that for the larger population countries of South Asia, workersemployed abroad and their remittances are major components of their GDP – over3% for India to 8.5% for Sri Lanka, 8% for Bangladesh, 7.2% for Pakistan, andalmost one-third for Nepal! Moreover, this proportion has grown significantly overthe last decade for all except Maldives. What these volumes of transactions illustrateis a high level of “influence” of these transactions on migrant labor and theirfamilies’ living and choices in South Asia.

However, the picture is hardly all rosy. The UN Department of Economic andSocial Affairs (DESA) estimates that of more than 250 million people currentlyliving outside their countries of origin, including the 200 million “south-to-north”migrant workers, under 10% work is in the “high end” of the international economy.These privileged ones are mostly born and/or educated in developed countries.On the other hand, at the “low end” of the international economy, the migrantworkers from developing countries are mostly engaged in “dirty, difficult, or dan-gerous” work (ibid.). The tremendous hardships that migrant workers can face arevisible in newspaper stories, the lyrics of folk songs, and socially engaged art, suchas the “I have to feed Myself, My family and My country” series by Nepali artistHitman Gurung (2018).

Improving opportunities: The opportunities for movement of workers willremain an important feature of the globalized economy. When planned properlythey have benefited national economies of both low- and higher-income countriesand changed life for the better for many of the families of the migrant workers.Education policymakers across South Asia have to take into account these

Table 2 Remittance flows, proportion of GDP, and 10-year growth rate per country in SouthernAsia

Country Remittance in 2016 (US$ mill.) % of GDP % Growth 2007–2016

Afghanistan 312 1.6 –

Bangladesh 13,680 7.9 108.5

Bhutan 21 1.0 619.5

India 62,745 3.3 68.6

Maldives 4 0.1 �52.4

Nepal 6,276 32.2 262.0

Pakistan 19,847 7.2 230.9

Sri Lanka 7,252 8.5 189.2

Source: IFAD (2017), Sending Money Home, Contributing to SDGs, One family at a time, p. 24

10 B. Jamil et al.

opportunities and consider foreign employment a viable path for many of thestudents in their care. Helping South Asian youth move up the employment valuechain to higher-skilled jobs is good for them, their families, and also the nation. Italso ensures better working conditions, safer workplaces, and a greater possibility toguard against exploitation. Policies and actions, especially at the national level, areneeded that address skill and educational development for overseas work opportu-nities alongside diplomatic efforts to protect the rights and dignity of workers andbetter utilization of the remittance income for families and society.

The consequences of remittances on national education systems cannot beignored. Significant portions of remittance funds are invested in educating youth.The public sector must consider how this spending, alongside tax receipts andinternational aid, can be a major source of funding toward meeting SDG goals. Asthe IFAD report on “Sending Money Home” put it, “Now is the time to fully engagethe ambition of 200 million migrants who send money home, and bring to scale theirremittances and savings to help reach the SDGs by 2030: One family at a time”(IFAD 2017, p. 12).

Regional Integration in South Asia

South Asia, the historical and civilizational entity comprising the Indian subconti-nent, was for centuries one of the most culturally distinctive and integrated regions inthe world. Today, it is the least integrated.

The nation states which came into being in postcolonial South Asia in 1947 fromthe breakup of British India into three separate states, each of which was overzealousin asserting its newfound national identity. The borders that severed connectionsbetween India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) restricted free movement ofpeople and goods across their hitherto integrated geographical space. Road, rail,river, and sea routes were cut which had for long served as an integrated system ofcommunication, trade, and public administration. Whatever communication andconnections remained in a limited way were almost totally cut off after the India-Pakistan war in 1965. Bangladesh, emerging in 1971 as an independent countrycomprising the former eastern part of Pakistan, inherited this disrupted communica-tion. All of the subcontinental countries seem to be still hostage to the “partitionsyndrome” that continues to hold them back psychologically and emotionally, intrade and politics from reviving the connectivity that existed historically (Karim2018).

A recent World Bank study of the state of regional trade in South Asia points outthat despite history and geography, regional intercountry trade accounted for only5% of international trade in South Asia, compared to 50% for East Asia and thePacific countries. A South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) agreement came intobeing in 2006, but real tariff-free trade in the region remains only an aspiration.Countries in the region continue to put barriers to trade by adopting “para-tariffs,”that is, duties on imports kept out of SAFTA. In addition, more than one-third ofintraregional trade in South Asia falls under what is called “sensitive lists,”

Education Systems in South Asia 11

comprising goods that are exempted from the tariff rationalization measures underSAFTA. There is a host of non-tariff barriers in the form of procedures, regulations,and administrative obstacles. Trade within the region in services, such as tourism,education, and medical and business services, is inhibited by restrictive visa regimes,among other barriers (Kathuria 2018).

The study advocates intraregional trade as complementary to and as a steppingstone for deeper global integration. In the South Asia context, it emphasizes specificsteps in four areas as the appropriate ways to enhance intraregional trade in goodsand services: (a) addressing cross-border tax distortions by reducing sensitive listsand para-tariffs; (b) removing other non-tariff barriers; (c) improving procedures andinfrastructure; and (d) reducing connectivity costs (Ibid.).

A sustainable program of trade integration needs to focus, according to the study,on critical reforms that would help the economy take advantage of trade liberaliza-tion and trade facilitation, promoting the ease of doing business. It is also necessaryto improve the links among education, training, and the job market to supplynecessary skills to the sectors to ensure gain from new trade and economic oppor-tunities. The study also identifies a trust deficit as a problem.

“Cross-country studies show that nations in which there is a lot of trust amongpeople do well economically. . .Trust promotes trade; and trade fosters trust,interdependency, and constituencies for peace. Bad history can still result in positiveoutcomes, provided our countries take incremental yet concrete steps to tap thepotential of deeper integration in the region,” writes Kaushik Basu, the CornellUniversity economist, in the foreword of the World Bank study, A Glass Half Full:The Promise of Regional Trade in South Asia (Kathuria 2018, p. xvi).

The key message from the analysis of the regional integration in South Asia isthat the people and countries in the region have much to gain by looking at andpromoting greater interchange, collaboration, and cooperation within the region,supported by appropriate economic as well as education, skills, and employmentpolicies, without necessarily abandoning opportunities that lie farther afield. Thelabor and consumer market in South Asia after all would cater to a quarter of theglobal population! It is an opportunity waiting to be realized, while other neighbor-ing countries/regions (China, Iran, and Central Asia) continue to build in-roads forinfrastructure, trade, and broader economic advantages.

Winners and losers: Globalization has created winners and losers in and amongcountries, and there are positive and negative aspects of it, as explained above. Theevolution of the concepts and practices of globalization at national and internationallevels has been anything but smooth and linear. It has produced both ardent pro-ponents and strong detractors. Particularly in the recent decades, there has been astrong pushback from quarters who have in the past been generally the protagonistsof globalization, especially the economic aspects of it. Among them are the UnitedStates under President Trump and many European governments as well as certainsocial forces in these countries supporting a rightist political lurch reflecting anationalist, protectionist, anti-immigration, and xenophobic position.

In his speech to the General Assembly at the United Nations in September, 2018,Donald Trump declared, “We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the

12 B. Jamil et al.

doctrine of patriotism.” He went on, “America is governed by Americans” and that“responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from globalgovernance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination.”In Trump’s mind, global governance is synonymous to a form of internationalterrorism (Richter 2018).

The US withdrawal from the Paris climate change accord in 2017, Trump’s “tradewar” threatening to reverse the trend of the evolution of a global free-trade regime,the anti-immigration attitude and position of the US Administration, and the rhetoricencouraging a retreat to “fortress America” of by far the largest economy, themightiest military power and still the powerhouse of science, technology, research,and innovation in the world, are a setback for the positive forces of globalization.More importantly, the US Administration position offers comfort and encourage-ment to the ultranationalistic, protectionist, divisive, and xenophobic tendenciesacross the world and a justification for other countries to behave in the same manner.This position also deprives the proponents of globalist and internationalist ideals andaspirations of leadership and the moral boost that the United States could offer theircause.

Taking an optimistic view, it may be argued that the present situation is a passingphase and the world will return eventually on the track of global integration and tofaith in the common fate of humankind on the planet. Nonetheless, the presentinterregnum is a reminder to take a critical view of globalization and the need toaim for a finer balance among the global, regional, and national circumstances,needs, and priorities. It is also important to consider the nuances and balancingneeded in the educational responses to the contradictory effects of globalization.

Dealing with It: Promising Initiatives

In this section, some initiatives to deal with globalization issues showing promise inSouth Asia are discussed. These include harnessing technologies and the SustainableDevelopment Goals (SDG) 2030 discourse and agenda in the South Asian context.

Harnessing Technologies

Several technology-linked learning initiatives led by the public and private sector, aswell as civil society organizations, have emerged in South Asia as part of a digitallyvibrant Asia with large markets. These provide hope and possibilities of “quickgains” for the human development agenda with lesser historical baggage and barriersof geographies at national and global levels for tech-enabled learning and improvedgovernance education.

The emergence of education technology (EDTech) solutions globally, in Asia andSouth Asia as tracked by the growing market share of students (all levels), self-pacede-learning, and mobile or m-learning (Maurer 2018) is potentially a game changerand is inextricably linked to globalization, economic reforms, and markets.

Education Systems in South Asia 13

EdTech and digital media for learning, education, training, and governance areemergent growth sectors that will continue to proliferate through global and localcollaboration. Technology to accelerate learning as a continuous life skill is wellreflected in SDG Indicator 4.4.1: “Proportion of youth/adults with information andcommunications technology (ICT) skills, by type of skill.” Although the globalindicator is restricted to youth and adults, the region is addressing learning needsfor all, including school age children, teaching, research, and management cadres.

A recent Asian Development Bank (ADB) study (2017) of three South Asiacountries (Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka) explores the policies and practices inICT and their potential impact on equity, quality, efficiency, and scalability ineducation. ICT for tech-enabled education is examined with respect to teachers,learners/students, and school environment to improve learning outcomes. Countriesare seen to be in an emergent phase (Bangladesh and Nepal) and in application phase(Sri Lanka). All need to focus on coordinated efforts to sustain the gains and realizethe potential from technology. Five strategies to optimize technology applicationsare proposed for the region:

(i) Better coordination of ICT in education initiatives and efforts within theeducation sector and with other sectors

(ii) Better technical support for teachers as they use ICT for teaching and learning(iii) Just-in-time and differentiated ICT in education professional learning for

teachers in schools(iv) Localized and customized intelligent tutoring system, video-recorded lessons,

and ICT-mediated resources(v) Monitoring and evaluation of ICT use in schools (ADB 2017, p. XI)

Policies, innovative initiatives and proliferation of learning apps, and MOOCshave influenced the Asian region’s efforts to meet the twenty-first-century jobmarket, workforce, and continuous learning needs. Diverse innovators and investors,both local and global (Lynch 2018), have come forward to “find, train, and invest”in thousands of startups and social enterprises in the education and learningecosystem through incubators, e-learning, and mobile learning platforms. A fewexamples are worth mentioning: Village Capital Sankalp Forum, Mindspark, DigitalClassrooms Pratham in India and the National Incubation Center (NIC), Plan 9,Microsoft Innovation Center the Nest I/O, in Pakistan, representing both private andgovernment-backed initiatives. These are in turn supported by global business andlearning partners.

South Asia’s large numbers of potential students, teachers, and school/college/university systems constitute a market that offers a robust potential to the emergingEdTech entrepreneurs, catering to the twenty-first-century skills, inclusive assistivelearning and design needs, providing a bridge between learning and the labor market.

A recent DFID-funded scoping study for Heart (2018), which included SouthAsia and Africa, highlights some important takeaways:

14 B. Jamil et al.

(i) EdTech tools are appropriate and “ready” for deployment in developmenteducation, largely as a result of private-sector growth in mobile devices, mobilebroadband, and other consumer technologies.

(ii) The need for usable research is critical as a response to the proliferation ofinnovative solutions and the concomitant responsibility to understand which ofthese is most effective and offers the highest value for money (VfM) in a givensituation.

(iii) EdTech is increasingly linked to the development of twenty-first-century skillsas governments identify creative problem-solving and similar abilities in theworkforce as critical to improving economic and social well-being.

(iv) National education systems in many countries, and as aggregated in regions andinternationally, represent a powerful source of potential demand for newsolutions, whereas current practice primarily entails repurposing of hardware,software, networking, and services developed for consumer markets (HEART2018, p.ii).

Recent rigorous studies on tech-enabled learning gains such as by Murlidharan etal. suggest room for optimism (2019). EdTech and its variants have the potential tobe a game changer for education, learning, and workforce development in thetwenty-first century.

Is educational technology the panacea that solves major educational problems?Now that the debate is more pressing than ever about the potentials of technology ineducation, it is important to look at the pros and cons. A twenty-first-century view oflearner success requires students not only to take advantage of the technology but tobe thoughtful consumers of digital content, demonstrating competencies and skills incommunicating ideas in new ways. We live in a digital world in which technology isa life skill. To acquire and use the skills in one’s life and in learning, young peoplehave to form a deep understanding of the digital environment and adapt intuitively tonew contexts.

There are downsides of technology in the education context which must not beignored. Technology in the classroom can be a distraction unless it is handled in ablended format judiciously with guidance from the teacher. Technology can discon-nect students from social interactions, especially by the lure of social media.Technology can prompt cheating in class and on assignments and makes plagiarismtoo easy and tempting. The quality of research and sources based on “Google search”still call for judgment and reasoning to reject the vast world of “junk” and identifyauthentic and credible information. Proper lesson planning, updating relevant infor-mation and knowledge, and adapting these to the diverse needs of learners are labor-intensive and time-consuming tasks for the conscientious teacher, which requiressupport as well reflected in the ADB study.

Technology itself can be a source of disparity and division among learners.Students don’t have equal access to technological resources, because their familiescannot afford them; they do not come from tech-savvy home environment, and theinstitutions are not able to make the resources available adequately and equitably for

Education Systems in South Asia 15

all students, where libraries and community resources do not exist. A new digitaldivide could exacerbate the existing societal divisions.

Do the benefits of technology outweigh the negatives? In the hyper-connectedworld, the use of technology is essential and unavoidable to enhance education. Theresults depend on the extent the policies and actions address the obstacles. The key totechnology in education is always going to be the teacher-student interactions;technology can be a highly effective tool, but that’s all it can be – a tool. Technologyis not meant to replace the teacher (Himmelsbach 2019).

Taking into consideration both the opportunities and the difficulties, a regionalinitiative for collaboration and cooperation, such as a South Asia education techalliance, could be a breakthrough for twenty-first-century learning challenges,operating virtually and serving as an example of what the region could achieve toset aside the “deficit” notion of education.

SDG 2030: The Global Agenda

Besides economic, cultural, and political forces of globalization described above,other phenomena have come to the fore lately which affect people and societiesacross the globe. Effects of climate change and global warming, dangers of interna-tional terrorism, and threats of a nuclear Armageddon have led to a new level ofawareness about common risks and dangers to humankind and the planet that itinhabits and the need for collective global response. There is no way of hiding fromthese common dangers and shutting oneself up by building a fortress, as notedearlier. There is a growing awareness that we are in it together and the threats haveto be overcome together. The ambition has to be to help repressed groups fight theiroppression, combat unfair deprivation and inequity, promote justice and humandignity, and protect the planet, balancing the needs of the present and the futuregenerations.

This collective global endeavor was given an institutional form for the first timein 2000 under the United Nations auspices in global Millennium Development Goals(MDG) for the year 2015. With well-documented successes and some lessonslearned during this period, another global agenda for Sustainable DevelopmentGoals (SDGs) for 2030 was adopted in 2015. The global agenda for developmentand the pledge to engage in collaborative national and international action representthe positive face of globalization. It represents a determination to turn globalizationinto a force of positive transformation for the benefit of humankind. Eliminatingextreme poverty and building inclusive economies and equitable and just societieswith a stake for everyone are the overarching global agenda for SDG2030. Itcomprises 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) including Goal 4, the over-arching education agenda. Goal 4 is a pledge to “Ensure inclusive and equitablequality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” (UnitedNations 2015).

A humanist vision of education as an essential common good is the key to aglobal and integrated framework of sustainable development goals. This vision

16 B. Jamil et al.

embraces inclusion; transformation of the educational landscape; new roles ofeducators and learning in a knowledge society; and rethinking of work, life, andcitizenship in a changing, diverse, and yet interconnected world (UNESCO 2015).

SDG 4: The Education Goal

SDG 4 has been elaborated into seven substantive targets and three additional onesrelated to modalities of implementation. These targets concern provision of 12 yearsof free, publicly funded, equitable quality primary and secondary education, qualitypre-primary education and early childhood development, and education and trainingopportunities for out-of-school children and adolescents, addressing all forms ofexclusion and marginalization, disparities, and inequalities including genderinequality in access, participation, and learning outcomes.

Commitment is expressed to achieving quality education and improving learningoutcomes by strengthening inputs, processes, and evaluation of outcomes andmechanisms to measure progress. Lifelong learning opportunities for all, in allsettings, and at all levels of education has to be supported including better accessto quality technical and vocational education and training and higher education andresearch. Teachers and educators have to be empowered, adequately recruited,motivated, and supported within well-resourced, efficient, and effectively governedsystems.

Education goal and targets: Strong global and regional collaboration, coordi-nation, and monitoring of the implementation of the education agenda based onadequate data, analysis, and reporting are promised, as well as well-targeted increasein financing, with increased public spending on education in the country context,taking into account international and regional benchmarks of allocating at least4–6% of gross domestic product and/or at least 15–20% of total public expenditureto education (see Box 1).

Box 1 SDG 4 and TargetsGoal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promotelifelong learning opportunities for all.

Targets

4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and qualityprimary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learningoutcomes.

4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality earlychildhood development, care, and pre-primary education so that they areready for primary education.

4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable andquality technical, vocational, and tertiary education, including university.

(continued)

Education Systems in South Asia 17

Box 1 (continued)4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have

relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment,decent jobs, and entrepreneurship.

4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education, and ensure equalaccess to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable,including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children invulnerable situations.

4.6 By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, bothmen and women, achieve literacy and numeracy.

4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills neededto promote sustainable development, including, among others, througheducation for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, humanrights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and nonviolence,global citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’scontribution to sustainable development.

4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability, and gendersensitive and provide safe, nonviolent, inclusive, and effective learningenvironments for all.

4.b By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships avail-able to developing countries, in particular least developed countries, smallisland developing states and African countries, for enrolment in highereducation, including vocational training and information and communica-tions technology, technical, engineering, and scientific programs, in devel-oped countries and other developing countries.

4.c By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, includingthrough international cooperation for teacher training in developing coun-tries, especially least developed countries and small island developingstates.

Source: UNESCO (2015). Education 2030: Incheon declaration andFramework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable DevelopmentGoal 4. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656e.pdf

A Response Framework for South Asia

In this concluding section, a response to the challenges to globalization is proposedtaking SDG 4, the overarching education agenda, adapted and adjusted to the SouthAsian context, as the framework for priorities and action. Citizen-led acceleratedassessment and learning strategies through evidence-based solutions for out-of-school vulnerable groups (never enrolled and dropouts) and for in-school children

18 B. Jamil et al.

at risk; “The Learning Generation” idea and the “progressive universalization”principle advocated by the UN Secretary General-appointed Education Commission;South Asian countries’ standing in the new Human Capital Index; and the global andnational indicators for SDG 4 to guide action and monitor progress are brieflydiscussed. These provide the backdrop for pursuing the education and developmentagenda in South Asia in the context of globalization’s diverse manifestations.

Civil Society Activism

Civil society collective action platforms for education and learning that cross bordersare emerging in South Asia as promoters of education as national and global publicgoods. Some of these promote evidence-based learning solutions to address qualityand equity challenges.

The Annual Status of Education Report (ASER), a citizen-led household-basednationwide survey on learning levels, began in 2005 in India, pioneered by theglobally renowned civil society organization, Pratham. It spread to Pakistan (2008)through Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi (ITA), to East and West Africa (2008/2009),Mexico (2012), and to Nepal (2016). This citizen-led movement has been informingcommunities and governments alike about the challenges of learning together withsolutions for accelerated learning, viz., “teaching at the right level” (TARL), “com-bined action for maximized accelerated learning” (CAMAL), and Read India or“Chalo Parho Barho (CPB, Let’s Read and Grow)” in Pakistan. Campaign forPopular Education (CAMPE) in Bangladesh has been since the 199Os a forum ofcivil society and education NGOs serving as a platform for citizen participation ineducation policy dialogue. It has also been producing a survey research-based annualEducation Watch reports on aspects of quality, equity, and inclusion in basiceducation in Bangladesh.

Today these initiatives, as recommended by the Learning Generation Report(Education Commission 2017), are being documented as case studies of GlobalPublic Goods, where solutions that work are tracked for evidence, accompanied bycapacity building initiatives and networks to leapfrog change in learning process andresults (Education Commission 2018).

The countries engaged in the movement of assessment of learning have forged aPeople’s Action For Learning (PAL) Network, with a secretariat in Nairobi, througha South Asian/Indian pioneered initiative by Pratham in 2005. The PAL Network hasso far influenced 40 low- and low-middle-income countries in Asia, Africa, andLatin America. In times to come, there will be more examples of such practiceswhere knowledge exchange, systematic actions, and debates will continue to influ-ence the possibilities for accelerated and improved learning outcomes.

The “Learning Generation.” The characteristics of globalization and economicreforms in general and their manifestation in South Asia have been outlined above.How do they influence and impact human resource development as key levers ofeducation system development in South Asia? Taking into account the context ofglobalization and the state of regional integration, the sections in this chapter have

Education Systems in South Asia 19

attempted to address the opportunities and challenges for South Asian educationreforms.

To recapitulate, with eight countries, including three of the world’s high popula-tion countries and a total of 1.8 billion people, South Asia is a region that has arecord of high economic growth, distinctively young demographics, and resilientsocieties accustomed to coping with natural and man-made disasters. There are hugechallenges of poverty, conflict, structural discrimination of caste, inequality, andpush back from colonial legacies. Impressive rapid education progress has beenachieved by 2015 – Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Maldives, and Sri Lankaachieving high participation in primary education and rapid increases in secondarylevel enrolment. Pakistan and Afghanistan continue to lag in key education metricsand are in need of leapfrogging strategies, learning from regional achievements.

The Learning Generation (2017) Report by the Education Commission argues for“progressive universalism” as a core principle for inclusive practices. Its premise isthat universal participation in education requires that people who are poor also mustgain as much as those who are better off, rather than wait for eventual trickle down ofbenefits. The Commission recognizes the scarcity of public resources and advocatesprogressive universalism. It argues for funds to be allocated to highest returnactivities and to those least able to pay for services. Such an approach of progressiveuniversalism enabled Korea to provide a quality education for all, as Ju-Ho Lee, aCommission Member, noted (Education Commission 2017).

The Human Capital Index. The index developed recently in 2018 under theWorld Bank auspices comprises the six indicators (three education and three health/survival): Probability of Survival to Age 5; Expected Years of Schooling; Harmo-nized Test Scores; Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling, Children Under 5 NotStunted, and Adult Survival Rate.

The Human Capital Index is a measure of a government’s investment in improv-ing the health and educational status of its workforce, resulting in better productivity(Lancet 2018). The underlying premise is that measuring and ranking countries bytheir human capital would enable comparisons over time, thereby providinggovernments and decision-makers insights into where critical investments wereneeded to improve education and health.

According to its first ranking of 195 countries, the South Asian countries rangedin ranking from 102 to 188, the lower being the better (Table 3).

Finland topped the list in 2018, the United States was 27th, and China was placed44th. Conducted on behalf of the World Bank by the Institute for Health Metrics andEvaluation at the University of Washington jointly with University of California, LosAngeles, the study on the measurement of human capital was published in thejournal Lancet (September, 2018).

Global and national targets, strategies, and indicators for SDG4. Each coun-try in South Asia individually and through regional consultations has participated inthe process of formulating the SDGs and SDG 4 agenda, targets, and strategies. Thecountries have collectively committed themselves to work toward fulfilling theagenda, refining and adapting these to their specific conditions and circumstances.There is an ongoing process of shaping, elaborating, implementing, and tracking

20 B. Jamil et al.

progress of national educational development and reform in each of the countries inthe region.

The framework document for SDG4 has proposed indicative strategies for each ofthe seven targets and three implementation modalities. A set of indicators also havebeen proposed which will serve as a guideline for elaborating plans and programsand for monitoring, assessing, and sharing information about progress. Four levels ofindicators have been proposed:

(a) A small set of globally comparable common indicators for all SDGs(b) A larger set of thematic indicators for SDG4, also comparable across countries,

proposed by the education community to help articulate programming andtracking their progress

(c) Regional indicators which may be formulated to take account of regionalcontexts and needs

(d) National indicators selected from the proposed global template, adapted fromit or developed specifically in the country context (see Incheon Declarationand Framework for Action, Annex 1, Proposed Global Indicators, and Annex2, Proposed Thematic Indicators Framework.)

Other chapters in this volume in varying degrees would look critically at thenational and regional endeavors and initiatives within the broad framework of SDG4agenda and further examine specifically how and to what extent pertinent issuesarising from the globalization debate, as presented above, are taken into account.

We suggest that the discussion of globalization issues and their implications foreducation and human resource development lends support to the proposition thatquality, equity, and inclusion in education are the critical themes in the exploration ofobjectives, strategies, and how these can be effectively pursued in educationaldevelopment in South Asia.

Quality. Encompassing curriculum, teaching learning processes, assessment andmonitoring systems, textbooks and learning materials, technologies, and innova-tions, quality of education is a critical concern. Especially in South Asia, mereexpansion of education and schooling has become counterproductive when

Table 3 HCI ranking of South Asian countries

Country HCI rank among 195 countries

Sri Lanka 102

Maldives 116

Bhutan 133

Nepal 156

India 158

Bangladesh 161

Pakistan 164

Afghanistan 188

Source: World Bank, HCI (2018)

Education Systems in South Asia 21

juxtaposed against learning challenges. The global learning crisis is very muchpresent in South Asia; the region is both a major contributor to and victim of thequality gap. The challenges of learning lie as much as in the teaching learningprocess as they do in curriculum, textbooks, assessment, teacher preparedness, andclassroom practices.

The comparability of data and metrics on learning for the region to keep eachother informed across the countries is a major concern. There are gaps in informationabout teacher adequacy, preparedness, and care as well as making schools function atan acceptable performance level.

System capacity aligned to children’s learning and developmental stages needs tobe improved to keep pace with new technologies and innovations in learning. Suchan approach calls for critical national investments and partnerships of public andprivate actors playing their respective parts effectively. Targeting of quality initia-tives to the deprived and disadvantaged group is critical to achieve system goals, butnot an easy path to traverse in an environment of structural inequity and politicalinstability.

Equity in education. It is strongly influenced by two concurrent strands, viz., (a)learning as a universal good for every individual irrespective of circumstance(gender, birthplace, ethnicity, religion, language, income, wealth, or disability) and(b) notion of fairness and social justice. These ideas have been articulated system-atically in multiple international conventions and agreements. These agreementsendorse the principle of universality in promoting rights and fulfilling obligations ofstates and societies in respect of basic personal, economic, and social entitlements.SDG 4, in particular SDG 4.1 and 4.5 together, makes the case for an uncompro-mising stand on equity and lifelong learning for all – girls and boys, women andmen, irrespective of socioeconomic status, geography, ethnicity, and personal abil-ities and attributes (United Nations 2015).

Equity challenges are particularly stark when juxtaposed against poverty/income,gender, geography, religion, displacements in natural disasters, and conflict. Girls’access to learning remains singularly vulnerable globally where disadvantage occursin crippling combinations of gender and poverty, gender and traditions, gender andconflict, gender and lack of safe proximity to schools, gender and disability, genderand minorities, etc.

Inequity is exacerbated when it is not attended to in foundation years of educa-tion. The nexus of poverty, stunting, child development deficits, and the absence ofearly learning opportunities has been well researched, reinforced by recent work onbrain development in the very early years. Windows of opportunities provided bynature are being compromised by poverty, malnourishment, and stressful environ-ment for young children (WDR 2018).

Inclusion. Leaving no one behind, inclusive development with stake in it for all,emphasized in the global agenda, is especially relevant in the region. It has to be amajor sub-theme in all education quality and equity strategies and initiatives inSouth Asia.

22 B. Jamil et al.

Conclusion

Challenges and opportunities go hand in hand in the context of globalization and thefast pace of economic growth. A globalized world creates new opportunities for thegovernments, private sector, civil society, and global capital to work collaborativelyfor innovative solutions that work at scale. South Asia’s experience of globalizationhas not been entirely encouraging so far. Remittance and foreign employment, whichare an important feature of globalization, have benefited national economies of bothlow- and higher-income countries in the region and changed life for the better formany of the families of the migrant workers. Similarly, digital technology and itsapplication in the real world have helped leapfrog development in many differentways. These opportunities, however, have to be crafted by negotiating acrossmultiple layers of identities, historical baggage, fractured governance, structuralinequalities, and recent pushbacks against positive aspects of globalization.

In the education context, globalization can be used for the common goal ofachieving SDG 4 framed boldly by the right to education movement within thehybrid centralized and decentralized settings of the region. Looking at the meaningand significance of globalization for educational development within the frameworkof SDG 4, it is necessary, in the process of carrying out country analysis anddeveloping strategies and plans, to keep asking a number of questions:

• Is there an environment to support education technology, and other innovations ineducation, including public-private partnerships, cognizant of the potential ofremittances and diaspora, and access to capital for social enterprises that supportquality learning with equity and inclusion?

• To what extent resetting of public policy and action priorities, especially bettergovernance, transparency, and accountability to control corruption, waste, andinefficiency, are geared to making right to education a reality?

• How is the importance of skills, capabilities, and values or a moral compass forlife flagged as educational challenges for citizens and workers in each country andin the context of cross-country and global opportunities?

• To what extent are the positive and negative aspects of globalization in the SouthAsian context actually or potentially the driving forces for education policyobjectives and education system and program priorities? What critical concernsare ignored or underplayed in the educational policy discourse?

• What are the major constraints in the education system and the surroundingpolitical dynamics including administrative and political centralization anddecentralization arrangements in responding to globalization and economicreform issues? How are these being addressed?

• What shifts are necessary in conceptualization of problems and policy develop-ment to construct holistic and coherent educational (and cultural) responses toglobalization and economic reform challenges? What can be and should be done– practical, pragmatic, as well as aspirational?

Education Systems in South Asia 23

The chapter also advocates for and makes a case for linkage between the role ofcivil society and globalization in the region. In a globalized setup, collective actionplatforms led by civil society organizations have supported an equitable and inclu-sive education as a public good resulting in improvement of people’s well-being.The strengthening of system capacity and mechanisms of service delivery, however,need to be improved to keep pace with new technologies and innovations in learning.Given the political economy of the education sub-sector that prevails in the region,critical national investments and partnerships of public and private actors playingtheir respective parts effectively remain a continuing struggle.

Globalization, with all its critiques, is an inevitable phenomenon and a fact of ourdaily existence that cannot be wished away. South Asia, with its eclectic ancientcivilizations and rich cultural traditions of inclusion and diversity, is well positionedto use globalization to make advances in building social capital and encouraging newforms of global citizenship meaningful at local, national, and global levels. Fulfillingthis vision, however, requires careful planning, good governance and coordinatedefforts, and above all, a widely shared mission to leapfrog barriers to learningsolutions and propel human development to a higher trajectory.

References

ADB. (2017). Innovative strategies for accelerated human resource development in South Asia:Information and communication technology for education – Special focus on Bangladesh,Nepal, and Sri Lanka. Manila: Asian Development Bank.

Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W.W. Norton.ASER Center. Pratham India. (2005). https://www.asercentre.org. Accessed 4 Nov 2018.ASER Pakistan. Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi. (2009). http://aserpakistan.org/index.php. Accessed 4

Nov 2018.Basu. K. (foreword). In A glass half full: The promise of regional trade in South Asia.Washington,

DC: The World Bank. (Kathuria, 2018, p. xvi).Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking away the ladder: Development strategy in historical perspective.

London: Anthem.Chang, H-J. (2003). Globalization, economic development, and the role of the state (Essay

collection). London: Zed Books.Chusseau, N., & Hellier, J. (2012). Globalisation and inequality: Where do we stand? (Working

paper series 2012/279). Rome: Society for the Study of Economic Inequality (ENCINE).Education Commission: The learning generation: Investing in education for a changing world; A

report by the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity. (2017).http://report.educationcommission.org/report/.

Education Commission: Investing in knowledge sharing to Advance SDG 4. InternationalCommission on Financing Global Education Opportunity (Education Commission) (2018),Center for Global Education at Asia Society, Results for Development, Teach For All, TheBoston Consulting Group, and World Innovation Summit for Education.

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar,Straus and Giroux.

Gaible, E. (2018). A Scoping Study: Transforming Education Through Technology (Heart).Galasso, N., &Wood, M. (2015). 8 ways to reduce global inequality, February 26. https://fpif.org/8-

ways-reduce-global-inequality/

24 B. Jamil et al.

Giddens, A. (2000). Anthony Giddens discusses the globalization debate. Carnegie endowment forinternational peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2000/07/05/anthony-giddens-discusses-globalization-debate-pub-8655

Gurung. (2018, April 19). I have to feed myself, my family and my country. . .. Retrieved fromhttp://hitmangurung.blogspot.com/p/project-2012.html

Himmelsbach, V. (2019). 6 Pros & Cons of technology in the classroom in 2019. EducationTechnology Blogs, January 2, 2019. Toronto: Top Hat Education Technology. https://tophat.com/articles/education-technology/

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-01-02-how-asia-is-emerging-as-the-world-s-edtech-laboratory

Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical Update – UNDP NY, 2018.International Fund For Agricultural Development (IFAD). (2017). Sending money home, contrib-

uting to SDGs, one family at a time. Rome: IFAD.Karim T. (2018). Reviving the Bengal Presidency template of connectivity: Regional prosperity

sans the colonial baggage. Daily Star. Accessed 4 Nov 2018.Kathuria, S. (2018). A glass half full: The promise of regional trade in South Asia (South Asia

development forum). Washington, DC: World Bank.Kuriata A. (2016). Hijan – Muslim response to globalisation? Człowiek i Społeczeństwo

(Vol. XLI, pp. 147–161). Poznań: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=517637

Lancet. (2018). Measuring human capital: a systematic analysis of 195 countries and territories,1990–2016. September 24, 2018. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31941-X/fulltext

Learning to Realize Education’s Promise. World Development Report. (2018). World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2018

Lynch, M. (2018, May 06). 10 Edtech Investment Groups and venture capitalist firms that youshould know about. Retrieved from https://www.thetechedvocate.org/10-edtech-investment-groups-and-venture-capitalist-firms-that-you-should-know-about/

Maurer, T. (2018, December 27). How Asia is emerging as the World’s Edtech Laboratory –EdSurge News. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-01-02-how-asia-is-emerging-as-the-world-s-edtech-laboratory

Milanovic, B. (2012). Can we discern the effect of globalization on income distribution? Evidencefrom household budget surveys, Chap. 15. In B. Milanovic (Ed.), Globalisation and inequality.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Milanovic, B. (2016). Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

Murlidharan, K., Singh, A., & Ganimian, A. J. (2019). Disrupting education? Experimentalevidence on technology-aided instruction in India. American Economic Review, 109(4),1426–1460.

Oxfam. (2018). Reward work not wealth. London: Oxfam.PAL Network – Peoples Action for Learning Network. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://palnetwork.

org/Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Richter, S. (2018). Why Donald Trump is Completely Wrong About Globalism. The Globalist.

Accessed 4 Nov 2018. http://www.theglobalist.com/globalism-patriotism-donald-trump-united-states/

Ritzer, G. (2008). The McDonaldization of society. Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful: A study of economics as if people mattered. London:

Blond & Briggs.Seabrook, J. (1996). Third World Network Features. http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27c/

432.htmlSen, A. (2002). How to judge globalism. The American Prospect, 13, pA2. http://www.sas.upenn.

edu/~dludden/SenGlobalism.htm.

Education Systems in South Asia 25

Seth, S. (2019). South Asia: The new face of emerging economies. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/022316/south-asia-new-face-emerging-economies.asp

Stiglitz, J. E. (2006). Making globalization work. New York: W. W. Norton.Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. (2015). https://www.un.org/sustainablede

velopment/sustainable-development-goals/UNESCO. (2015). Rethinking education: Towards a global common good? Paris: UNESCO.

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002325/232555e.pdf.White, P. L. (2006). Globalization and the mythology of the Nation State. In A. G. Hopkins (Ed.),

Global history: Interactions between the universal and the local (pp. 257–284). London:Palgrave Macmillan.

Winters, A. L., McCulloch, N., & McKay, A. (2004). Trade liberalization and poverty:The evidence so far. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(1), 72–115.

World Bank. (2018). World Bank Human Capital Index. http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2018, http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital

26 B. Jamil et al.