Is Carbon offset the solution to global warming?

Discussions about global warming are usually considered overdone. The melting of icebergs in the Atlantic, the death of the polar bears and the threats of small islands vanishing under sea are nothing new. But how many people are actually aware of the extent of these threats of global warming? How many people and businesses are actually aware of their own contributions to global warming? How many people, businesses and governments are actually exerting efforts to minimize if not stop their contributions which are potentially harmful to the environment? And what could be those efforts?

Let’s talk about carbon offsets.

Big companies and businesses are the biggest contributors to global warming. However, while individual consumers’ effort to prevent further contribution to global warming such as minimizing the use of plastics or recycling and reusing of non- biodegradable materials would only mean a little of discomfort, forced reductions of greenhouse gas for businesses and companies would mean reduction of their profitable production. That is tantamount to losing in business. Reductions of greenhouse gas for them might include controlled frequency of travels via air and land, etc.

On the other hand, instead of us forcing companies and businesses to radical or impossible reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG), we can let them pay to reduce global GHG. This is how carbon offset comes in.

But how does carbon offset work?

Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories of greenhouse gases. One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.

Offset companies first estimate a customer's personal carbon output. Their Web sites include carbon calculators that determine the total GHG produced by a year's worth of electricity or driving, an event or even a round-trip flight. Offset companies then charge an amount based on their own GHG price per ton. When you buy an offset, you fund projects that reduce GHG emissions. The projects might restore forests, update power plants and factories or increase the energy efficiency of buildings and transportation.

On the opposition side however, carbon offset is seen to encourage indulgence. It is a way for the guilty to pay for absolution rather than changing. According to English environmentalist George Monbiot, carbon offsets are an excuse for businesses as usual with regards to pollution.

The lack of regulation in the voluntary market is another issue. No standard governs the industry and some offset providers are even accused of exaggerating or misleading carbon reduction claims. For example, 1000 dollars offset used to fund the planting and growing of a 1000 trees in the Ecuador will be reported even if the trees died in two years.

With the above arguments given, thus the question; can carbon offset be the solution to global warming?

Remittances and International Aid: How to make them work?

Overview: This essay evaluates both the public and the private foreign aid and their impact on the economy of the developing countries.

Remittances and Its Impact

With about 175 million people now living outside their countries of birth, migrant remittances are emerging as a new strategy for poverty alleviation in developing countries. 1 It provides valuable financial resources to the poor and it help “to stabilize irregular incomes and to build human and social capital” (the World Bank).

In the Philippines alone, almost 10% of the population works overseas. The country has become the third largest-migrant sending country next to Mexico and India, with more than 7.5 million Filipinos residing and/or working overseas. In 2003, US$7.6 billion in remittances were recorded to have flowed through formal channels to the Philippines. But this amount is believed to be only half of what is actually sent or received due to money transfers made through unregulated channels. 2 For more than three decades now, the overseas workers have become the pillar of the economy.

If remittances are indeed a vital tool in creating wealth in the poorest conditions, why is the Philippines economy, once one of the strongest in Asia, now ranks near the bottom? How exactly do remittances help the migrants’ families back home?
Remittances have direct impact on families as well as indirect impact to the country. The economic standing of many Filipinos has improved because their breadwinners had earned salaries overseas many times over what they could have earned in the Philippines. Over the years, a significant proportion of Filipino families have relied on foreign remittances or income from abroad as a main source of income. Remittances are then spent for family consumptions: education, health and housing, etc. This consumptive behavior does have its multiplier effects which contribute to human development. Migration also eases the burden of the government of the Philippines in dealing with a high unemployment rate which recently has hit 12.4%, while remittances act as a buffer to balance of payments deficits and the country’s reserves in times of crisis.3

Where the importance of remittances is recognized in reducing poverty, too much dependence on the “diaspora” left its downsides unexamined. The question remains on whether the benefits of migration compensate for the costs of the sending country, such as the brain drain and the social disruptions of families. The drain of often the best and the brightest – industrious and skilled workers, engineers, teachers and entrepreneurs, mothers and fathers – from a sending country reduces the country’s capacity for long-term economic growth and human development. For the OECD countries as a whole, there are around 3 million migrants with a tertiary education. It has been suggested that if it costs say US$ 20, 000 to educate someone to this level, then the total wealth transferred from poor countries to rich countries is roughly now around US$ 60 billion. 4

Dependence on the export of people also presents a moral hazard. The bulk of remittances sent to the families are used excessively to buy consumer goods instead of going into productive activities or investment projects. The Philippine government, instead of creating jobs needed to keep up population growth, helps find job in other countries, encourages workers to go abroad and processes some job applications. The government invests little money in manufacturing, education and healthcare. 5 The inflows of remittances allow the government to postpone painful but necessary reforms in governance, in improving income distribution through direct equity measures and in facing up to the need of population control.6

On the horizon of open borders, where labor has moved and scattered, the host country has only felt benefits. Migrants and overseas workers had not only made up the shortfall in skilled and unskilled labor, but they also contributed to the local economy as consumers and investors, taxpayers even. Despite such positive effects on the host economy, international labor mobility is severely curtailed. 7

Beneath the Surface of Public Foreign Aid

Public Foreign Aid has long been seen as a tool for promoting economic growth in developing countries. Since 1951, Western countries have given developing countries more than $1 trillion in economic and humanitarian aid. Aid amounts have been on a constant rise in recent years. In 2004, official development assistance to poor countries was reported to reach its highest level ever. 8 The United States alone provided almost $19 billion in aid.9

How has this money improved the lives of the people in poor countries?

On the surface it appears that the vast of money given as aid will suffice to alleviate the poor from poverty. However, in depth evaluation of the case will bring essential questions to attention. What happened to the billions of people who are still living in poverty? How far does the development aid able to bring us in meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the most important of which is to reduce absolute poverty by half by 2015? To what extent is the distribution of development assistance directed to the poorest countries?

Several reasons were identified why aid does not work well in enhancing the economy of poor countries.

1. The maldistribution of international aid.
The way in which donors distribute their international aid differs markedly across countries. The Netherlands and the Uk broadly direct their bi-lateral development
assistance to the poorest countries. In marked contrast, Japan and the US spend large amounts of their development assistance in small, relatively well-off countries. France and Germany’s aid programs are neither particularly pro nor anti-poor. Much of the development assistance provided by the World Bank goes to the large developing countries (such as China, India and Indonesia) which account for a large share of world’s poverty. In contrast, the European Union spends a large proportion of its aid on relatively well-off middle income countries. The UN system occupies an intermediate position giving large amounts of aid to the poorest countries, but also spending considerable amounts in rather better of countries in Eastern Europe, North Africa and Latin America. 10

2. Failure to meet the elusive 0.7 percent target.
In 1970, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution affirming that the rich countries should progressively increase their official development assistance (ODA) spending. The donors were said to “exert their best efforts” to reach the aid target of 0.7 percent of their Gross National Income (GNI) by the middle of the decade. By 1975, only two countries, the Netherlands and Sweden, had succeeded in living up to that promise. Today, only five of the 22 Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member countries – Denmark, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden – have reached the goal. Japan, on the other hand, has cut its aid budget from 29 percent (between 2003-2004) to currently 0.19 percent of the countries national income. Canada and Australia though seem charitable, have decreased aid funding from the mid-1990s. 11

3. Aid to support a geopolitical mindset.
Instead of allocating their aid based on where it is more needed, rich countries often favor recipients that are of direct political or economic interest to them. Many European donors favor countries in former Yugoslavia, Europe’s own restless backyard. In 2002-2003, ex Yugoslavs states ranked as number one recipient of aid from Austria, Germany, Greece, Switzerland, Norway and European Union. Over 79 percent of all Greek development assistance went to other European nations. Much of this aid is motivated by domestic political concerns, above all fear of uncontrolled immigration from crisis-stricken countries nearby. Many European nations also favor their old colonies where European companies often have strong presence. In 1982-1983, Israel and Egypt, both key US allies, ranked as biggest recipients of US foreign aid. The US has indeed succeeded in boosting its development assistance; however, the vast of new money has not gone to the world’s poor but to advance US strategic goals in the “war on terror” in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries. 12

4. Tied aid and the Overpriced technical assistance.
Many rich nations tie their development assistance to purchases of goods and services from the donor countries. Poor countries get aid but only under the condition that they spend it in a way that benefits businesses in the donor countries. Tied aid constitutes a form of government subsidy because taxpayer money is used to buy goods and services from domestic companies and aid recipients only get the product. The overpriced technical assistance, similar to tying, is another inefficient form of aid where poor countries – in need of expertise – are heavily charged. In 2003, an estimated 18 billion – more than a quarter of total aid – was spent on technical assistance, mainly on consultants advising and supporting recipients governments. 13

5. Inflating the Statistics.
Some rich countries often include non-aid expenses in official development assistance statistics – to boost ODA figures artificially. Examples of this include counting debt relief and classifying immigration-related costs within the donor country as development assistance, or including refugee-related expenditures in the figures of development aid. 14

A significant number of people from rich countries have had doubts about the effectiveness of foreign aid, including concerns about corrupt foreign governments. Yet, if the entire bureaucracy in the system of public foreign aid will continue to motivate its distribution as well as the practices of inefficient forms of aid, how genuinely could development aid help in moving towards the Millennium goal?

Could Private and Public Foreign Aid Intersect?

The trend of migration and remittances due to a failing economy illustrates the concept of the Knowledge Problem – the complex question of how we choose to organize and use the resources to make us better off15; the idea of Property Rights – the bundle of rights not limited to physical goods such as land or other possessions but also include ones labor and intellectual property16; and an example of what philosophers have referred to as Spontaneous Order – where it is unnecessary to have an understanding of economic phenomena in order to have coordinated social cooperation that leads to economic progress. 17

For developing countries such as India (which received $23 billion in 2004 in remittances, up from $17.4 billion in 2003) 18, Pakistan (where migrant workers sent home almost $260 million in 2004), 19 Mexico (the nation’s annual remittance inflows has doubled since 2002 and reached $20 billion in 2005)20 and the Philippines, the idea of using remittances to face the demand of survival, human resources – labor and intellect – seem to be the last hope standing. It is also of big help that in the global market, there is a shortage of workers where skilled labor is in demand and well paid. While in their own yard, day to day survival is a struggle and opportunities are meager, people from poor countries migrate to foreign land with a thirst of success. The government, seeing the impact of remittances on families and to the country as a whole, finds ways to enhance the flow of its people.

Why do poor countries turned to remittances as their last hope in the first place? Is it because of the insufficient development assistance they received? Is it possibly caused by the bundles of debts that most of their money goes to? Or is it simply due to poor governance?

Public Foreign aid is undeniably a great help in financing development in developing countries. However, to make aid work for the poor, there is an urgent need of reform in the aid system. Donors should end their practices of tied aid and artificial boosting of aid figures. Donors must also refrain from prioritizing geopolitical objectives that result to an unfair distribution of aid. The funds must be allocated where it is more needed. Or perhaps it is better if “most aid will be allocated through cooperative, multilateral channels rather than bilateral ones that are too easily influenced by short-term political and economic considerations”.21

The poor countries, recipients of both the private and public foreign aid, must – on their own – maximize and mobilize resources, and execute reforms in governance. The bulk of remittances, if properly harnessed with fiscal discipline and mobilization of savings, could in the long term serve as a driver for economic reform for migrant countries of origin. In the Philippines for example, where remittances had been used mostly to excessive consumption, more can and should be done to educate not only the overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) but also the beneficiary of remittances as to savings and other productive use of remittances.22 The productive use of the [fairly distributed] public foreign aid, can help in strengthening the economic growth of developing countries that can sufficiently oppose the forces of brain drain and remittances [dependency] syndrome. While reforms in governance must include – dealing with economic, political and social problems, developing effective governance, eliminating corrupt leaders and officials, and implementing stable government policies to protect the interest of mankind and not to favor the perpetuation of power groups and the elite.

At the point where private foreign aid and public foreign aid will intersect, and coupled with genuine reforms in governance, absolute reduction of poverty will certainly be at hand.

____________________________
1 Jet Damazo, “Overseas Workers’ Remittances can be Harnessed for Poverty Reduction in the Philippines” available:http://www.adb.org/media/Articles/2004/6162_Overseas_Workers_Remittances_Poverty_Reduction/
2 Ibid.
3 I. F. Bagasao, “Migration and Development:The Philippine Experience”
available: http://www.ercof.org/papers/wbpresentation.html
4 Ibid.
5 Richard C. Paddock, “The Overseas Class” A World Cconnected Essay, April 20 2006
6 I. F. Bagasao, “Migration and …”
7 Marina Durano, “Finance and Development: Issues Arising from the Asian Crisis, A View from the Philippines”, March 15, 1999
8 Official Development Assistance increases further – but 2006 targets still a challenge”, OECD Press Release, April 11, 2005
9 USAID:Chapter 6 – Objectives, Outcomes and Amounts of Foreign Aid
available: http://www.usaid.gov/fani/ch06/objectives.html
10 Bob Baulch, “AID FOR THE POOREST:The distribution and maldistribution of international development assistance”, Institute of Development Studies, CPRC Working Paper No 35.
11 Pekka Hirvonen, “Stingy Samaritans: Why Recent Increases in Development Aid Fail to Help the Poor”, Global Policy Forum, August 2005
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 “Knowledge Problem” A World Connected Essay Competition
16 ”Proper Rights” A World Connected Essay Competition
17 “Spontaneous Order” A World Connected Essay Competiton
18 “Global: Remittances make the world go round” .
available: http://www.irinnews.org/S_report.asp?ReportID=47161$SelectRegion=Southern_Africa
19 Ibid.
20 Richard Boudreaux, “The Seads of Promise” A World Connected Essay
available: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/
21 United Women’s Action Network, “Action Alert: Is 1% of Foreign Aid Enough?” Women’s Division – General Board of Global Ministries. Available: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/action_foreignaid.html
22 Jet Damazo, “Overseas Workers’ Remittances…”

ACHIEVING MILLENNIUM EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT

Overview:
Ensuring access to primary education for all children by 2015; "Will we make it?" is the most common question from all the concerned citizens of the world. But Education for all is neither an illusive dream nor an easy task. This essay discusses the ways on how to make education accessible to all in relevance and/or contradiction to Dr. Tooley's conclusions on Private Education and Entrepreneurship.

aWorldConnected.org
2006 essay competition

ACHIEVING MILLENNIUM EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT

Dr. Tooley: His conclusions on Private Education and Entrepreneurship

Professor James Tooley criticized the United Nations’ proposals to eliminate all fees in state primary schools globally to meet its goal of universal education by 2015. Dr. Tooley says the UN, which is placing particular emphasis on those regions doing worse at moving towards ‘education for all’ namely sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, is “backing the wrong horse”.1

On his extensive research in the world poorest countries such as Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, India, and China, Dr. Tooley found that private unaided schools in the slum areas outperform their public counterparts. A significant number of a large majority of school children came from unrecognized schools and children from such schools outperform similar students in government schools in key school subjects.2 Private schools for the poor are counterparts for private schools for the elite. While elite private schools cater the needs of the privilege classes, there come the non-elite private schools which, as the entrepreneurs claimed, were set up in a mixture of philanthropy and commerce, from scarce resources. These private sector aims to serve the poor by offering the best quality they could while charging affordable fees.3
Thus, Dr. Tooley concluded that private education can be made available for all. He suggested that the quality of private education especially the private unaided schools can be raised through the help of International Aid. If the World Bank and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) could find ways to invest in private schools, then genuine education could result. 4 Offering loans to help schools improve their infrastructure or worthwhile teacher training, or creating partial vouchers to help even more of the poor to gain access to private schools are other strategies to be considered. Dr. Tooley holds that since many poor parents use private and not state schools, then “Education for All is going to be much easier to achieve than is currently believed”.

Hurdles in Achieving the MED

Teachers are the key factor in the learning phenomenon. They must now become the centerpiece of national efforts to achieve the dream that every child can have an education of good quality by 2015. Yet 18 million more teachers are needed if every child is to receive a quality education. 100 million children are still denied the opportunity of going to school. Millions are sitting in over-crowded classrooms for only a few hours a day.5 Too many excellent teachers who make learning exciting will change professions for higher paid opportunities while less productive teachers will retire on the job and coast toward their pension.6 How can we provide millions of more teachers?

Discrimination in girls access to education persists in many areas, owing to customary attitudes, early marriages and pregnancies, inadequate and gender-biased teaching and educational materials, sexual harassment and lack of adequate and physically and other wise accessible schooling facilities. 7

Child labor is common among the third world countries. Too many children undertake heavy domestic works at early age and are expected to manage heavy responsibilities. Numerous children rarely enjoy proper nutrition and are forced to do laborious toils.

Peace and economic struggles are other things to consider. The Bhutan country for example, has to take hurdles of high population growth (3%), vast mountainous areas with low population density, a limited resources base and unemployment. Sri Lanka reported an impressive record, yet, civil war is affecting its ability to mobilize funds since spending on defense eats up a quarter of the national budget.8

Putting children into school may not be enough. Bangladesh’s Education minister, A. S. H. Sadique, announced a 65% literacy rate, 3% increase since Dakar and a 30% rise since 1990. While basic education and literacy had improved in his country, he said that quality had been sacrificed in the pursuit of number.9 According to Nigel Fisher of UNICEF Kathmandu, “fewer children in his country survive to Grade 5 than in any region of the world. Repetition was a gross wastage of resources”.

Furthermore, other challenges in meeting the goal include: (1) How to reach out with education to HIV/AIDS orphans in regions such as Africa when the pandemic is wreaking havoc. (2) How to offer education to ever-increasing number of refugees and displaced people. (3) How to help teachers acquire a new understanding of their role and how to harness the new technologies to benefit the poor. And (4), in a world with 700 million people living in a forty-two highly indebted countries – how to help education overcome poverty and give millions of children a chance to realize their full potential.10

Education for All: How?

The goal is simple: Get the 100 million kids missing an education into school.
The question: How?

The first most essential problem in education is the lack of teachers and it has to be addressed first. Teacher corps should be improved through better recruitment strategies, mentoring and enhancing training academies. 11 Assistant teachers could be trained. Through mentoring, assistant teachers will develop the skills to become good teachers. In order to build a higher quality teacher workforce; selective hiring, a lengthy apprenticeship with comprehensive evaluation, follow ups with regular and rigorous personnel evaluations with pay-for-performance rewards, should be considered.12 Remuneration of teaching staff will motivate good teachers to stay and the unfruitful ones to do better.

Problems regarding sex discrimination and child labor should be eliminated. The Beijing Platform for Action (BPFA), for example, addressed the problem of gender inequality. BPFA calls on governments and relevant sectors to create an education and social environment, in which women and men, girls and boys, are treated equally, and to provide access for and retention of girls and women at all levels of education.13 The Global Task Force on Child Labor and Education and its proposed role for advocacy, coordination and research, were endorsed by the participants in Beijing. The UN added that incentives should be provided to the poorest families to support their children’s education.14

Highly indebted countries complain on lack of resources. Most of these countries spend on education and health as much as debt repayments. If these countries are with pro-poor programs that have a strong bias for basic education, will debt cancellation help them? Should these regions be a lobby for debt relief?

Partly explains the lack of progress, the rich countries, by paying themselves a piece dividend at the end of the Cold War, had reduced their international development assistance. In 2000, the real value of aid flows stood at only
about 80% of their 1990 levels. Furthermore, the share of the aid going to education fell by 30% between 1990 and 2000 represented 7% of bilateral aid by that time. 15

Given this case, what is the chance of the United Nations’ call to the donors to double the billion of dollars of aid? According to John Daniel, Assistant Director-General for Education, UNESCO (2001-04), at present, 97% of the resources devoted to education in the developing countries come from the countries themselves and only 3% from the international resources. The key principle is that the primary
responsibility for achieving ‘education for all’ lies with the national governments.

International and bilateral agencies can help, but the drive has to come from the country itself. These countries are advised to chart a sustainable strategy for achieving education for all. This could mean reallocation of resources to education from other expenditures. It will often mean reallocation of resources within the education budget to basic education and away from other levels. 16


A Closer Look: Private and Public Schools

Some of the most disadvantage people on this planet vote with their feet: exit the public schools and move their children in private schools. Why are private schools better than state schools?

Teachers in the private schools are more accountable. There are more classroom activities and levels of teachers’ dedication. The teachers are accountable to the manager who can fire them whenever they are seen with incompetence. The manager as well is accountable to the parents who can withdraw their children.17 Thus; basically, the private schools are driven with negative reinforcements. These drives, however, bear positive results. Private schools are able to carry quality education better than state schools. The new research found that private schools for the poor exist in the slum areas aiming to help the very disadvantage have access to quality education. The poor subsidized the poorest.

Such accountability is not present in the government schools. Teachers in the public schools cannot be fired mainly because of incompetence. Principals/head teachers are not accountable to the parents if their children are not given adequate education. Researchers noted of irresponsible teachers ‘keeping a school closed … for months at a time, many cases of drunk teachers, and head teachers who asked children to do domestic chores including baby sitting. These actions are ‘plainly negligence’.

Are there any means to battle the system of negligence that pulls the state schools into failing? Should international aids be invested solely to private schools that are performing better and leave the state schools in total collapse? If private education seems to be the hope in achieving education for all, why not privatize all low performing state schools? Should the public schools be developed through a systematic change, will the competition between the public and the private schools result to much better outcomes? What is the chance that all educational entrepreneurs of the world will adapt the spirit of dedication and social works – offering free places for the poorest students and catering their needs?

Public schools can be made better. They can be made great schools if the resources are there, the community is included and teachers and other school workers get the support and respect they need. The government has to be hands on in improving the quality of education of state schools. In New York City for example, ACORN formed a collaborative with other community groups and the teachers union to improve 10 low-performing district 9 schools. The collaborative won $1.6 million in funding for most of its comprehensive plan to hire more effective principals, support the development of a highly teaching force and build strong family-school partnerships. 18

Standardized tests are also vital in improving schools and student achievements. It provides comparable information about schools and identifies schools that are doing fine, schools that are doing badly and some that are barely functioning. The data on student achievement provided by the standardized tests are essential diagnostic tool to improve performance. 19

The privatization of public schools is not the answer at all. Take for instance the idea of charter schools. As an alternative to failed public schools and government bureaucracy, local communities in America used public funds to start their own schools. And what started in a handful of states became a nationwide phenomenon. But according to a new national comparison of test scores among children in charter schools and regular public schools, most charter schools aren’t measuring up. The Education Department’s findings showed that in almost every racial, economic and geographic category, fourth graders in traditional public schools outperform fourth graders in charter schools. 20

If the government can harness the quality of state schools, and if the World Bank and the Bilateral Agencies could find ways to invest on both the private and the public schools - instead of putting money only on the private schools where only a small fraction of students will have access to quality education while the majority are left behind – then ‘genuine education’ could result.

Conclusion

Education for all apparently is a simple goal, yet, is taking a long time for the world to achieve. Several of destructive forces are blocking its way to meet the goal and the fear of failure is strong. Numerous solutions are available to fix the failed system of public schools but the best solution is still unknown. Several challenges are faced by the private schools to meet their accountabilities, but the resources are scarce. Every country is committed to develop its education to bring every child into school but most are still struggling with mountainous debts.

‘Primary education for all by 2015’ will not be easy. However, everyone must be assured that the millennium development goal is possible and attainable. Since the Dakar meeting, several countries reported their progress in education. In Africa, for example, thirteen countries have, or should have attained Universal Primary Education (UPE) by the target date of 2015. 23 It challenges other countries, those that are lagging behind in achieving universal education to base their policies on programs that have proved effective in other African nations. Many more are working for the goal, each progressing in different paces. One thing is clear; the World is committed to meet its goal. The challenge is not to make that commitment falter, because a well-educated world will be a world that can better cope with conflicts and difficulties: thus, a better place to live.



_________________________
1 “Leading educationalist critises UN proposals for global state primary schooling”, 2005
Available: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-09/uonu-lec090705.php
2 Tooley, James. Essay on”Private Schools for the Poor”, 2005
Available: http://www.educationnext.org/20054/22.html
3 Tooley and Dixon. Chapter 2, “The Failures of State Schooling in Developing Countries and the People’s Response”, Index of Economic Freedom. 2006
4 Tooley, James. Essay on “Private Schools for the Poor”, 2005
5 All Eyes Turn to Teachers, Global Action Week 24-30th April 2006
available: http://www.campaignforeduction.org/action/action country updates.html
6 Watkins, Tom. “Public Education Continues to Make Our lives Better”, Fall 2001
7 Toolkit for Women, Earth Summit 2002
8 Padgaonkar, Latika. “Education for All Update”, UNESCO New Delhi
9. Ibid.
10 Looking Ahead, EFA 2000 Assessment. Available:http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/background/07Bpubl.shml
11 Moskow, Michael H. “Remarks”. The Fourth Annual Newman Lecture. May 24, 2005
12 Ibid. emphasis added.
13 Zabala, Earnest M. “Gender Equality in education: world fails to meet MDG 3”
14 UN-backed meeting calls for more donor aid to meet education for all shortfall
available: http//www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?News ID = 16751 & crl =
15 Daniel, John. :Education As a Development Priority, 718th Wilton Park Conference, 1-5
Sept. 2003
16. Ibid
17 E.G. West Centre, School of Education, University of Newcastle, England, NE1 7RU
00 44 191 222 3503-egwest@ncl.ac.uk
18 ACORN: Working for Better Public Schools. www. ACORN.org
19 Michigan Education Report (2001-04) “Standartized tests vital for improving school and student acheivement”. Fall 2001 Issue
20 Charter Schools in America. Aired: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 7-8 PM ET
21 Education for All in Africa: paving the Way for Action.
Available: http//www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/background/07Bpubl.shml