Cluster description

In the last two decades a large body of empirical Educational research being carried out at the ISS covers six broad themes:

Equity and exclusion in education

Certain educational reforms categorized as ‘neo-liberal’ have affected primary, secondary, and higher education. With their emphasis on competition, privatization and decentralization of public education, testing, uniformity of standards, and accountability, these competition-based reforms have conspired against a politics of inclusion, equality, and equity in some societies. For those

people who begin from a weak position in the spheres of knowledge, skills, access to goods and services, or control over resources, what happens when they are left to themselves in the open market of education? What alternatives currently exist to market driven reforms?

Economic returns to education

In the last two decades a large body of empirical literature has been developed that investigates economic returns to education. The empirical evidence unambiguously suggests that education contributes to higher individual incomes and social welfare, and a reduction in poverty. Nevertheless, several questions still remain, especially with respect to the size and distribution of these effects, and methodological issues (i.e. estimation methods, measurement and data quality). Our current research investigates heterogeneity in returns to education and the characteristics of this heterogeneity. Are there intra-household educational externalities, do individuals within a household share their education (more generally, do they pool resources)? Does education generate external effects at the societal level and how are these external effects distributed?

Education and Economic Shocks

Educational investments may be compromised when households are faced with unexpected transitory income shocks, such as resulting from crop failure or an economic crisis. Under typically incomplete financial markets, the investment decisions of households are bound by credit and resource constraints. Households’ consumption smoothing strategies may then involve reducing investments in education or increasing child labour. Our recent research has investigated how enrolment and child labour are affected by economic shocks, and whether social interventions, such as social safety nets and conditional cash transfers, are effective in protecting access to education for the poor.

Education, Children and Work

How does children’s work relate to their protection and education? This question has commanded much political, media and public attention in the last decade, both nationally and internationally. For lack of comprehensive understanding of the topic, policy makers, advocates, and the public follow ill-suited conventional wisdoms, sometimes with disastrous results for children. Much of what many think they know about this topic is not supported by empirical evidence, while more accurate and useful understanding based on research and experience remains poorly disseminated. Accessible, evidence-based research that covers the topic comprehensively and empirically is being undertaken.

With the rise of the "quality imperative" on development agendas, schooling gets a broader meaning. Rather than or on top of, serving a human capital function, schooling is also supposed to contribute to individual capability enhancement, and as such to provide the basis for more inclusive and equitable societies. Yet quality education remains a conceptually ambiguous concept and research on it is underdeveloped. Included in the question of quality education are issues relating to social differentiation: what are the implications of the gender and (social class) background for quality education? Is quality education the same for every child, or should we differentiate?

Education, Governance and Decentralization

This theme looks at the institutional organisation of education policy and management. In particular, we are interested in the implications of fiscal and political decentralisation for public spending and social service delivery. It is often assumed that decentralisation will lead to a more equal distribution funds, more accountability and more efficient and effective delivery of services. Our aim is to investigate this assumption critically and empirically: who benefits from public spending in the context of decentralisation? Under which conditions can decentralisation lead to improved service delivery and when is it prone to local elite capture and corruption?