Global poverty and Education

One of the salient features of international politics in the post-Second World years has been the concern that has been expressed about poverty in the Third World. This has grown because it is now realized that much of the turbulence of the modern day has its roots in the economic deprivation of the poor that causes unrest. For decades poverty was addressed by the rich countries' pumping in economic aid into the developing economies. But this made little impact on the conditions of the poverty stricken. First of all bigger loans meant a greater debt burden and repayment of loans - sometimes with high interest - leaving governments with insufficient resources. Secondly, the aid was not always used judiciously and failed to change the lives of many people. Thirdly, corruption led to a lot of the aid being siphoned off by undeserving people.

It is only now when terrorism has raised its ugly head that it is being realized that a program for poverty reduction does not simply call for enhancing the resources for development as was being done earlier. Strategies targeting specific sectors that can act as catalysts for change are called for.

In this scheme of things education has acquired a high priority. Oxford University and UNDP have developed a new index to measure poverty - the Multidimensional Poverty Index -which assesses "the nature and intensity of poverty at the individual level in education, health outcomes, and standard of living". These are considered to be basic to poverty. If these needs can be met, populations may find it easier to cope with other factors such as low income, employment constraints and so on.

Although this change in focus and the emphasis now being placed on education is a welcome development, merely identifying a key issue in the discourse on poverty is not enough.  The fact is that, as experience has shown, addressing the problems of the education sector appropriately is one of the major challenges governments as well as multinational aid donors face today. In the first place the backlog of failures is so massive - governments failed to grasp the significance of social development of the people and education traditionally received not enough funds - that to undo the damage that has been inflicted is a huge challenge.

Then for a long time education was viewed as a very sensitive area of national life given its close link with the culture and the ethos of a people. Hence no government liked to hand over key decisions on education to a foreign agency as the aid givers are wont to demand. It is only in recent years that this reservation has been done away with and the World Bank and other aid giving agencies have entered the field in a big way. In Pakistan's case the war on terror has proved to be the key factor that has prompted donors to show more interest in education. It is now believed that the rise of extremism and militancy is linked directly to the failure of the education system. Although it may not be entirely true, but to a great extent, the collapse of the public sector education in Pakistan combined with poverty has enabled the madressahs to win over a substantial ratio of their enrolment. Many of the students are easily motivated for jihad and terrorism.

But the fact is that extremism has been spawned in the mainstream education system of Pakistan as well. A school curriculum that is not integrated into the economic life of the people and is not planned to adjust to their basic needs does not stabilize societies. It does not equip people with the tools needed to help them to earn a living and alleviate poverty. In spite of this known fact education in Pakistan has remained isolated from the national economy and the socio/cultural ethos of the people. Thus it has failed to enhance the quality of their lives.

  Hence this approach is not an ideal solution as the absence of self-reliance and being overly dependent on donors has never been. Moreover, it is customary that the aid which flows in has generally benefited the rich classes while denying the poor of the advantages of availability of resources for programs designed to alleviate their hardship. 

Forcing governments to submit to the diktat of donors who are not necessarily sensitized to cultural norms may create difficulties of another kind. Hence the task of mobilizing forces in favor of education must primarily be the responsibility of indigenous forces. To recount the fruits of education at this late stage would appear to be a redundant exercise - this has been done so often and no one now questions the need for education for a society that wishes to progress socially, economically and politically. But this needs to be done to re-emphasize the importance of promoting education to alleviate poverty.

Studies have now established beyond doubt that education, especially the education of women, can transform the lives of people and lift them out of the morass of poverty. In her book, Paradise Beneath her Feet, Isobel Coleman, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, writes that in view of a woman's central role in the family, educating her has a profound impact on the next generation of her children. She cites Oprah Winfrey to prove, "If the goal is slowing population growth, improving children's health and nutrition, reducing infant mortality, increasing the likelihood of the next generation attending school, combating the spread of HIV/AIDS, and even improving agricultural productivity, girls' education is indeed a powerful lever".

Incidentally all these factors have a direct bearing on poverty. Besides, education is not an apolitical medium of knowledge and learning. It is a political tool. If democracy and the rule of law constitute its underpinnings, education can emerge as the most powerful agent for change. That more than anything else can help reduce poverty.

The problem with the strategies adopted by international agencies to promote education in the Third World is that they begin from the wrong premise. It is widely believed that the poor do not know what is good for them and it is therefore important to provide them education that is regarded to be essential for progress and development as the West sees it. The poor are required to adapt themselves to modern education. But that is really not the best approach. In fact that is a major factor that has very often hindered the spread of education.

It is important that the needs and concerns of the people for whom education is designed should be kept in mind. Education should be tailored to their needs. For instance, trying to teach children in a language that is not their mother tongue can be detrimental to their intellectual growth. Similarly teaching them what is not relevant to their lives and work can prove to be negative and frustrating for them. Not planning the school term according to the seasonal needs of agricultural societies, especially when the entire family is involved in harvesting the produce, can be deterring. Not shaping lessons to the practical needs can also be counter-productive. Education per se will not eliminate poverty. Meaningful education will.

The writer is a senior journalist and a former Dawn staffer. She writes extensively on social issues including education and health.

Facebook | Twitter | Email

Comments (0)

Show/hide comments

Show/hide comment form