Global Education Policy:

austerity and profit

stephen j. ball

Global Education Policy:

austerity and profit

Traduccin Antonio Francisco Canales Serrano

Servicio de Publicaciones

Universidad de La Laguna, 2012

Coleccin: Publicaciones institucionales Serie: conferencias/5 Edita: Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad de La Laguna Campus Central 38200 La Laguna. Santa Cruz de Tenerife Telfono: +34 922 319 198 Diseo Editorial: Jaime H. Vera. Javier Torres. Cristbal Ruiz. 1 Edicin 2012 Prohibida la reproduccin total o parcial de esta obra sin permiso del editor

Preimpresin: Servicio de Publicaciones Produccin: FDC (Fabricacin Canaria del Disco)

Depsito Legal: TF 1.032/2012

ndice

Network governance ......................................................................................... Policy Epistemology ........................................................................................... Profiting from Education . ................................................................................ Conclusion . ....................................................................................................... Gobernanza en red ............................................................................................. Epistemologa poltica ....................................................................................... Obtener beneficios de la educacin .................................................................. Conclusin . .......................................................................................................

7 11 13 19 21 26 28 34

Bibliografa ............................................................................................................................................................. 37

I want to make the argument today, that increasingly, on a global scale, education policy is being done in new ways, in new spaces by new actors, and that many of these new spaces are private, in all senses of that word, rather than public and democratic. As a result educational governance and the educational state are being changed in some very marked ways, and education itself is being reworked as an opportunity for profit. Education services and education policy are now being commodified and bought and sold (Ball 2011b). On this basis of this I also will argue that policy analysts and researchers need a new toolbox of methods and concepts appropriate to the new post-national methods of policy and forms of policy relations.
Network governance

The changes, shifts and trends in education policy and in the form and modalities of the state to with I refer are sometimes conceptualised as the move from government to governance (or to new governance or network governance). That is:
Whether one points to the grand narratives of network society (Castells 2000) or reflexive modernity (Giddens 1991) or the more concrete and specific accounts of the formation and functioning of networks of public agencies, private organisations and diverse groups and citizens (e.g. Rhodes 1988), one finds the articulation of a need for rearticulating our understanding of government and authority based on an ontological change that has taken place in recent decades (Triantafillou 2004a, p. 489).

Network governance is a further move beyond the public bureaucracy state (Hood 1990) and a further reinventing of government (Osborne and Gaebler 1992) a new kind of governing mechanism

stephen j. ball

which relies on a dense fabric of lasting ties and networks that provide key resources of expertise, reputation and legitimization (Grabher 2004, p. 104). In effect three sets of changes are complexly interwoven here. One set involves a transmogrification of the form of the state; a second involves the deployment of new state modalities; the third is bringing about a new anthropology of policy and articulating new kinds of policy subjects. Together these changes give rise to new methods of governing at a distance through norms of efficiency, agency and accountability. This is not a hollowing out of the state rather it is a new modality of state power, agency and social action a form of metagovernance (Jessop 2002 p. 242). Having said that there is a danger that in concentrating on governance in terms of what may be new and different, what has remained the same may be inadequately attended to and that developments which do not fit the world according to governance are downplayed or ignored. The point is that there is no absolute change here but rather a shift in the balance or mix between the different elements of government bureaucracies, markets and networks. That is, more networks, more markets and less bureaucracy! Network governance, although the term is used somewhat loosely and diversely in political science to refer to a bewildering array of different phenomena and governmental practices (Triantafillou 2004b, p. 2), essentially involves the treatment of seemingly intractable public policy problems wicked issues that defy efforts to delineate their boundaries and to identify their causes (Rittel and Webber, 1973, p. 167 in Williams, 2002 p. 104) - through forms of managerial and organizational response around collaboration, partnership and networking (Williams 2002). That is, governments are increasingly catalyzing all sectors - public, private and voluntary into action to solve their communitys problems (Osborne and Gaebler 1992) and redefining themselves as facilitators engaged in value chains and working through markets rather than autarkic doers who owned, operated and produced everything themselves (Wanna 2009, p. 266). This is a shared problem-solving process or what Wanna calls co-labouring. Janet Newman (2001, p. 108) elaborates, pointing out that the governance literature views networks in terms of plural actors engaged in a reflexive process of dialogue and information exchange, or as Agranoff (2003, p. 28) puts it, networks provide venues for collaborative solutions and mobilise innovations. In slightly stronger terms, Rhodes argues that network governance refers to self-organising, inter-organizational networks characterized by interdependence,

global education policy: austerity and profit

resource-exchange, rules of the game, and significant autonomy from the state (Rhodes 1997, p. 15). It is argued by the advocates of network governance, that this brings a greater degree of flexibility and adjustment to the complexity of existing socio-economic conditions. Eggers (2008, p. 23) argues: The traditional, hierarchical government model simply does not meet the demands of this complex, rapidly changing age. Rigid bureaucratic systems with command-and-control procedures, narrow work restrictions and inward-looking cultures and operational models are particularly ill suited to addressing problems that often transcend organisational boundaries. Other writers argue that network governance and policy networks can provide an environment for consensus building and therefore limit the emergence of implementation resistance (Marin and Mayntz 1991). As Besussi (2006, p. 18) puts it the promise of policy networks and of the mode of governance they represent is to produce more effective and legitimate policies, without resting upon the authority and limitations of a single representative political body. Through all of this, public services are increasingly delivered through a mix of strategic alliances, joint working arrangements, networks, partnerships and many other forms of collaboration across sectoral and organizational boundaries (Williams 2002 p. 103) based upon relations involving mutuality and interdependence as opposed to hierarchy and independence (Peterson 2003 p. 1), although this interdependence is clearly, as a number of commentators point out, asymmetric (see Rhodes 1997). In general terms this is the move towards a polycentric state and a shift in the centre of gravity around which policy cycles move (Jessop 1998 p. 32), although in many of the accounts of network governance the role of the private sector in these movements and interdependences is omitted entirely or dealt with only in passing. And yet the private sector is an increasingly apparent and significant constituent of new governance, in education and elsewhere. Klijn and Koppenjan (2004) cut through some of this definitional undergrowth with a simple rendition which is apposite and useful. They say In the world of network governance, government is understood to be located alongside business and civil society actors in a complex game of public policy formation, decision-making and implementation (Klijn and Koppenjan, 2004, p. 25). Some versions of network governance relate the changes adumbrated above to a move to more democratic forms of governing (Srensen and Torfing 2008) while other writers suggest that network governance

10

stephen j. ball

creates a democratic deficit as the processes of policy and governing become more dispersed and more opaque (March and Olsen 1989). That is, not only do policy networks blur the boundaries between state and society but they also expose the policy making process to particularistic power games. The territory of influence (Mackenzie and Lucio 2005) over policy is expanded but at the same time the spaces of policy are diversified and dissociated. As a result, as these new sites within the contexts of policy influence and text production (Ball 1994) proliferate, there is a concomitant increase in the opacity of policy making. Within these new sites it is unclear what may have been said to whom, where, with what effect and in exchange for what (see Cohen 2004) although, to some extent, this has always been true of policymaking. As Skelcher argues these new social and political relationships of policy are also part of and contribute to other related features of the changing state they contribute to what he (1998) calls the appointed state and what he also (Skelcher 2000) describes as the congested state. Between them these descriptors seek to capture both the proliferation and fragmented array of agencies and actors involved in local and regional governance, and in the provision of public services (Sullivan and Skelcher 2004) and give some indication of the democratic deficit which results from the increasing participation of quangos, executive agencies, businesses and voluntary organizations in the governance of public institutions and their weaker accountability, audit and governance standards (Skelcher, 1998, p. 181). Keast, Mandell and Brown (2006, p. 27) argue that: This situation leads to governance complexity and what is contended to be a crowded policy domain in which differing governance arrangements, policy prescriptions, participants and processes bump up against and even compete with each other to cause overlap and confusion.... In all of this, Shamir (2008, p. 6) argues, governments relinquish some of their privileged authoritative positions. Increasingly, it would appear, it is in these decentralized, and more or less regularized and coordinated, interactions between state and societal actors that policy making unfolds (Coleman and Skogstad 1990, p. 4). Wright-Mills calls this, a new form of institutional mechanics (Wright-Mills 1959, p. 20) and indeed, by examining networks we are looking at the institutionalization of power relations (Marsh and Smith 2000, p. 6) in a new form. Such relationships are of course not entirely new; it is their extent, specificity, directness and degree of integration with government and state organisations that is different. That is to say, many different actors

global education policy: austerity and profit

11

and organizations, such as those referred to below, are now engaged in various mundane and informal ways in the day-to-day business of the state through face-to-face meetings, discussions, representations and consultations. They are there to bring particular sorts of perspectives, methods and interests to bear on and in the policy process. This then is the scenario that I will explore in relation to current trends in education policy. Trends that are evident in different ways within specific national settings, but also trends that are represented in the creation of new policy spaces beyond the nation state and separate from existing multi-lateral organisations and NGOs. However, at many points nationally and post-nationally the actors and agents who drive and inhabit these trends are joined-up. They are joined up socially, politically, economically and discursively within social networks and they constitute an epistemic policy community. They are both actors within, disseminators and beneficiaries of policy.
Policy Epistemology

Discursively, these new policy communities are joined-up by a shared belief in state failure, that state-run public services are ineffective and inefficient, resistant to innovation and self-interested (see box 2). Antonio Olmedos (2012) quotation from Jose Maria Aznars speech at the VIth European Forum on Education and Freedom, organised by ACADE (a Spanish Private Education providers Association), is a good example of the epistemology of reform the ex-prime minister (and President of FAES, the Foundation for Social Studies and Analysis, an institution dedicated to serving Spain and the concept of individual freedom (Website)) sees the monopoly of the State as the explanation of what he calls the failure of the Spanish educational system:
Education in Spain has suffered in the last twenty years the monopoly of insolvent and failed educational projects that have used it as an instrument to shape society according to their prejudices. Young people and their future are the main victims of these dreams of social engineering. (Aznar 2010, 9)

Set over and against such failures, and in response to the continuing intractability of social problems, is the market. As Bill Gates, founder of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, puts it where states,

12

stephen j. ball

multilaterals and traditional non-governmental organisations had failed, the market can succeed. Gates went on to say: the challenge here is to design a system where market incentives, including profits and recognition, drive those principles to do more for the poor (Microsoft News Center, 2008). Or in the words of the Clinton Global Initiative, founded by ex-US President Bill Clinton:
Corporations are researching and developing better business practices that meet social and environmental bottom lines while producing profits. Non-profits are pioneering enterprise-based models that offer potential for long-term sustainability. Governments are contributing their resources to encourage and support market-based approaches. (Clinton Global Initiative, 2010)

Put succinctly, entrenched problems of educational development and educational quality and access, as well as issues of gender equity, health and well-being and environmental sustainability are now being addressed, in national settings around the globe, through the involvement of social enterprises and businesses in the delivery of services, both privately and on behalf of the state. In education the participation of business and social enterprise organisations in the delivery of state education services is evident in the US within the No Child Left Behind programme (Burch 2009), and in England in the Academies programmes (Ball 2011a), in Sweden in the Free Schools programme (Arreman and Holm 2011), and in Spain in the participation of concertada schools (subsidised private schools) in the delivery of public education1. Private alternatives to the state are also increasingly evident in the setting-up of private storefront schools by local entrepreneurs and the creation of school chains by multi-national education companies, in Africa and India and elsewhere, in relation to the attempts of late-developing societies to achieve their Millennium Development Goals and to provide mass access to basic education. More and more international aid and philanthropy

1 Olmedo (2012) notes that As a result, Spain is now fourth in Europe in terms of the number of pupils attending private schools. Though the percentage of students in independent private schools is not particularly high (around 5%), the introduction of subsidized private schools enrolment changes the figure drastically (around 30%).

global education policy: austerity and profit

13

are no longer donated as grants to governments and NGOs but rather are invested in edu-businesses and in the development of market and social enterprise solutions to educational problems. Business methods and social enterprise initiatives are advocated as more effective ways of achieving wider access to and improved quality of education than, it is argued, can be achieved by governments or via traditional aid or charity. This approach is sometimes referred to as Corporate Social Capitalism based on investments that address social challenges and result in sustainable business (Tony Friscia, AMR Research inc. 2009). The shifts and moves involved here are made up of and driven by a complex set of political and economic processes involving advocacy, by policy entrepreneurs and Transnational Advocacy Networks (like the Atlas Foundation Liberty Network, of which in Spain Institucin Futuro is a member), and locally by think tanks like FAES (which has links with the Clinton Foundation), and Fundacin Burke, and, more specifically within the field of education, FUNDEL (Fundacin Europea Educacin y Libertad) and ACADE (Olmedo 2012), but also by business interests, venture philanthropies (Gates, Omidyar, IDP), and through the autoreform of the state. Indeed, perversely in some senses, the state is a vital player here as market-maker, as initiator of opportunities, as re-modeler and moderniser (Ball 2007a p. 82), increasingly states are acting more and more as a collective commodifying agent [...] and even as a market actor itself (Cerny 1997 p. 267). As Clarke and Newman put it:
Established typologies (the distinction between state and market or the hierarchy, markets and networks framework) fall short of new organisational forms and governance arrangements that are identified through such terms as boundary blurring or hybridity. Such terms mark the problem of naming these new arrangements, but bring problems of their own. (http://www.espanet-italia.net/conference2009/call-for-abstracts/18.php accessed 21st May 2010)

Profiting from Education

Over the last 10 years I have been exploring and researching these trends on a number of fronts, with work on UK edubusinesses (Ball 2007b), on UK corporate philanthropy (Ball and Junemann 2012), on policy entrepreneurship (Nambissan and Ball 2010) on global education

14

stephen j. ball

policy through the lens of neoliberalism (Ball 2012), and recently, with Antonio Olmedo, on global philanthropy and policy networks (Ball and Olmedo 2012). Here I want to offer two examples to illustrate the fairly abstract discussion presented so far. The examples involve Spain, and England and Sweden, and join-up these locations in convoluted ways (see box 2). These examples also represent one aspect of the role of the private and profit in education policy in rather stark ways, that is the role of private equity companies. The examples involve both private participation in the delivery of public sector services and private alternatives to the public sector. Box 1. A private equity firm is an investment manager that makes investments in the private equity of operating companies through a variety of loosely affiliated investment strategies including leveraged buyout, venture capital, and growth capital. Often described as a financial sponsor, each firm will raise funds that will be invested in accordance with one or more specific investment strategies. Typically, a private equity firm will raise pools of capital, or private equity funds that supply the equity contributions for these transactions. Private equity firms will receive a periodic management fee as well as a share in the profits earned (carried interest) from each private equity fund managed. Private equity firms, with their investors, will acquire a controlling or substantial minority position in a company and then look to maximize the value of that investment. (Wikipedia) Cognita Schools is one example of the interest and involvement of international corporations in education. Cognita was created in 2004 in the UK and is backed by Englefield Capital LLP (renamed as Bregal Capital LLP in 2010). Bregal Capital LLP, is a private equity firm with fund commitments which have risen to more than 3 billion since its creation. It is owned by Bregal Investments, a subsidiary of a holding company: Cofra Holding AG. Among others, Cofras business activities include C&A, a clothing retailing operation, Redevco, a large real estate enterprise, and IBI, a retail financial services operation. In 2004 Cognita bought 17 schools from Asquith Court, then the UKs largest private

global education policy: austerity and profit

15

nursery school company, and now runs a chain of 62 schools across the UK, Europe and South-Asia (Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam) and is actively seeking for further acquisition opportunities (website). In Spain it operates 7 schools in Catalonia, Madrid, Murcia, and Valencia. In England Cognita have also been in discussions with groups interested in setting up government funded Free schools. The Chairman of Cognita is Englands ex-Chief Inspector of Schools, Chris Woodhead. In June 2012 The Guardian newspaper reported that Cognita is under investigation by the Department for Education over claims that it has defrauded the generous state-run pension scheme for teachers (http:// www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/10/woodhead-schools-firmpensions-probe?newsfeed=true). The Chief Education Officer UK/Europe of Cognita is Jim Hudson OBE. Prior to his appointment at Cognita in 2005, he had been Headteacher of three state schools, including Two Mile Ash Middle School in Milton Keynes. He has also been an advisor to the Department for Education, the Teacher Training Agency, and the National College for School Leadership. Box 2. Progressive Vision: Why do progressives fear profit so much? The argument not to allow profit-making companies to expand in health care (or schooling) revolves around the idea that commercial interests and a commitment to quality are somehow incompatible. How many times have we heard the lament that if the greedy capitalists are allowed to run a private service, we will all suffer? Yet this expectation is not supported by the evidence. On the contrary, a private firm that does not give customer satisfaction through quality and value for money will soon fail and close as customers simply drift away. The Adam Smith Institute last year researched profitmaking in a Free Schools context. In doing so, they interviewed Sir Chris Woodhead, chairman of Cognita, Britains largest education chain with a total of 42 schools in England. he said every commercial decision is driven by a fundamental educational imperative: will what we are about to do or not do result in an improvement to the education our pupils receive?...We know that to succeed we have to convince our parents that a Cognitaschool should be the school of choice.

16

stephen j. ball

This means offering the best possible education at the most competitive price. Progressive Vision is an independent campaigning think tank, dedicated to promoting personal freedom through advocation of classical liberal policies in Britain. We believe that a dramatic expansion of personal freedom would not only lead to more fulfilling lives for individual men and women, but also to a more peaceful, tolerant and wealthier society. Progressive Vision is particularly interested in rolling back the state where it has intruded into our daily lives. (Website) Progressive Vision was founded in 2007 by Mark Littlewood, the Director General of the Hayekian Institute of Economic Affairs. Co-founder was Shane Frith who is the Director of the Brussels-based think tank New Direction. It runs a pro-tobacco campaign and is a supporter and partner of the Amend the Smoking Ban campaign, along with along with the Adam Smith Institute, Forest and the Manifesto Club. www,progressive-vision.org/blog/why-do-progressives-fear-profitso-much Olmedo (2012) says of companies like Cognita operating in Spain, and he identifies several others in his work:
As the State retreats from its role as the main actor in the provision of educational services, new players, from different sectors, with different interests, are beginning to flourish. Though these companies still operate in the independent private sector, given the rapid spread of the market principles within the Spanish education policy, it could be expected that these schools would at some part begin to receive public funding, as already argued for by the Spanish neoliberal advocates (Argadoa 1994; Arruada 1994; Martnez Lpez-Muiz 2001).

In Sweden edu-businesses are already active in the public sector and in receipt of public funding. Sweden now has about 20% of its school students educated in state funded Free schools most of which are owned and run by private providers. There are 900 such schools with approximately 80,000 students from 1 to 18 years. Two of these companies are now active in England, one, Kunskapsskolan sponsors and runs three schools as part of the Academies programme, another EIS recently won

global education policy: austerity and profit

17

a 21m 10-year contract to run Breckland Free School in Suffolk. Many other companies including the worlds largest provider of independent education abroad, GEMS, are reported to be already working with groups on setting set up Free schools in England, and Serco, Pearson (the worlds largest edu-business, is already testing out its school model in state schools in London) and Nord Anglia (which has a contract to run government schools in Abu Dhabi), have also express their interest in this development. In Spain FAES has been exploring and advocating the adoption of the Swedish Free school model2 The largest of the Swedish Free school companies, is John Bauer, with Upper Secondary schools in 20 locations, specialising in vocational education and training such as IT, media, entrepreneurship, health and physical, hotel management and catering. The John Bauer upper secondary schools have around 10,000 students from 16 to 19 years and almost 1,000 employees. Aside from the Swedish schools, John Bauer runs international schools in Spain, hotel and catering colleges in India and Norway, has other education ventures in China and Tanzania, and has property development activities in Central America and Indo-China. In 2007, the company had a turnover of SEK 757 million. In 2008 three companies (Drivkraft Vrend, Fourfront, Ultra Education) within the organisation were listed among the fastest growing companies in Sweden (Affrsvrlden, 2008). Also in 2008 the company announced that it had been invited by the Ministry of Education in Abu Dhabi (in the United Arab Emirates) to set up schools and introduce a similar system as in Sweden for its independent schools (Ultra Education, 2008). And John Bauer has indicated its aim to establish schools in other countries considered to have good potential for economic growth.
We are therefore now seeing the beginning of strong growth in private education in countries such as India, Nepal and Cambodia in order to cater

2 Bote, V. (2007). El cheque escolar para elegir en libertad la educacin de nuestros hijos. La experiencia sueca. Cuadernos de Pensamiento Politico, 14, pp. 173-184. Rojas, M. (2009). Libertad de eleccin y pluralismo. Propuestas para una reforma de la educacin espaola inspiradas en la Experiencia Sueca. Ideas para salir de la crisis, 26 http://www.fundacionfaes.org/es/documentos/ ideas_crisis/show/0091

18

stephen j. ball

for the needs of the growing number of students. Thus this trend, which generally started or strengthened around 2000, creates a strong demand for private education. /.../ the entrepreneurial spirit of the people behind John Bauer International, always keen to engage in new projects and to take the organization further, as well as a genuine desire to make a difference and contribute to the advancement of society through educational development, especially in lesser developed countries, are the very reasons for our existence (John Bauer International, website).

However, in 2009, John Bauer was bought by Denmarks largest private equity company Axcel which then had investments valued at DKK 14 billion. Axcels other main areas of investment are in housing, fashion and pet foods. Following the purchase of John Bauer (JBO) Axcel announced:
As part of the strategy for JBOs continued development, Axcel plans to extend and strengthen the companys general management and board. In realizing this strategy, the first move has been to appoint Alf Johansson as chairman of the board of directors. Johansson is the former director of Proffice, one of the largest recruitment companies in Scandinavia with a turnover of approximately SEK 4 billion. (http://axcel.customers. composite.net/content/us/media/2008/axcel_acquires_jbo_in_sweden)

These education companies exist in a blurred landscape of profit and public service. Their employees cross between the public and private sector. For their owners and funders, education services sit alongside other profit opportunities fashion, pet-food, property development - in diversified business portfolios. In times of austerity when other sectors of business are in recession educational services offer attractive alternative investment possibilities. Contracting out as a way of cutting public expenditure is also attractive to governments, as is the flexibility of contracts compared with bureaucracy. The companies are ambitious, expanding, global businesses working across national settings, bringing standardised practices curriculum, pedagogy and assessment - to bear. In the case of Sweden part of state education is now owned and operated by an overseas-based business. As yet we have little sense of the significance of the foreign ownership of national educational infrastructure or services and the limits that this may place on national policy options or the possibility that multi-national education businesses will use their leverage to influence national policies in their interest or the possible

global education policy: austerity and profit

19

consequences of business failures for national governments. Each of these examples, in different but related ways, indicate something of the degree interest in education by business, and the size and value of the various global markets in education services, but they only scratch the surface. Here also we see the growth, through acquisitions and mergers of global education brands which in some cases wield considerable financial influence in relation to education policy. These businesses and their representatives play their part in the purposeful destatalisation and commodification of education. The initiatives, ambitions and visions of the companies, work on the education system, as a form of economic attrition, converting public into private goods, bringing new practices, values and sensibilities into play. They take up roles within the discourse and infrastructure of education reform, converting education policy into a different sort of language, invested with different sorts of relationships, interests and purposes. Concomitantly the roles and structure of the state are changing. Increasingly states are monitors, contractors and target-setters rather than responsible for service delivery. The state becomes a regulator and market maker in a complex network of relations with a diverse set of actors and organizations.
Conclusion

What I have been trying to represent and explore here, to borrow from Ong (2006 p. 499), are new spaces of entangled possibilities which are constituted and enacted within new global education policy networks. It is tempting and somehow trite, but nonetheless true, to say that this is a complex, unstable and difficult terrain of research. In many respects we have neither the language and concepts nor the methods and techniques appropriate for researching these new landscapes and modes of policy. These developments and changes in education policy, affecting the forms and modalities of educational provision and organisation, have out run the current purview of our research agenda and that we need to adapt and adjust what it is we consider as research problems in order to catch-up. We need to ask different questions and also to look in different places for answers to these questions. We may also need some new skills and sensibilities if we are going to address these developments sensibly. In particular we must begin to draw upon forms of business and

20

stephen j. ball

financial analysis or to put it another way, we must follow the money. That is, among other things, policy researchers have to become regular readers of the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal, and stock market reports and must learn to read company accounts. There is also the need for methods and sensibilities which are attuned to movement and flow rather than structure and place, that is we have to avoid or move beyond flat and fixed ontologies, and think outside of the national policy box. Furthermore, we need to think about the temporality of processes, and the dynamic character of the interrelationships between heterogeneous phenomena (Rizvi and Lingard 2010) p. 7) as well as the dynamics of change in the global era, affected by combinations of material shifts produced by new technologies and mobilities, as well as non-material elements such as globally convergent discourses and locally resisting traditions (p. 8). This is what Urry (2003 p. 157) calls the mobility turn and Beck (2006) calls a cosmopolitan sociology with a focus on the interconnected, the reciprocal, the nonlinear and dialectical and the mutable and fragile. That is, a focus on the spatialising of social relations, on travel and other forms of movement and other transnational interactions, moments, sites, events and forms of sociality, in relation to policy and policywork. The nation state is no longer the appropriate level for policy analysis.

Quiero plantear hoy el argumento de que, de manera creciente y a escala global, la poltica educativa se est haciendo de nuevas maneras, en nuevos espacios, por nuevos actores, y que muchos de estos nuevos espacios son ms privados, en todos los sentidos de esta palabra, que pblicos y democrticos. Como resultado la gobernanza educativa y el Estado educativo se estn transformando en sentidos muy marcados, y la misma educacin est siendo reconceptualizada como una oportunidad para el beneficio. Los servicios educativos y la poltica educativa se convierten en la actualidad en mercancas y son comprados y vendidos (Ball 2011b). Sobre esta base argumentar tambin que los analistas polticos y los investigadores necesitan una nueva caja de herramientas de mtodos y conceptos apropiados a los nuevos mtodos y formas de relaciones polticas post-nacionales.
Gobernanza en red

Los cambios, desplazamientos y tendencias en la poltica educativa y en la forma y las modalidades del Estado a las que me refiero son a menudo conceptualizados como el trnsito del gobierno a la gobernanza (o a la nueva gobernanza o gobernanza en red ). Es decir:
Tanto si nos referimos a las grandes narrativas de la sociedad en red (Castells 2000) o a la modernidad reflexiva (Giddens 1991) o a las explicaciones ms concretas y especficas de la formacin y funcionamiento de redes de agencias pblicas, organizaciones privadas y diversos grupos y ciudadanos (e.g. Rhodes 1988), nos encontramos con la articulacin de una necesidad de rearticular nuestra comprensin del gobierno y la autoridad basada en un cambio ontolgico que ha tenido lugar en dcadas recientes (Triantafillou 2004a, p. 489).

22

stephen j. ball

La gobernanza en red es un paso adicional ms all del Estado burocrtico pblico (Hood 1990) y una nueva reinvencin de gobierno (Osborne y Gaebler 1992), un nuevo tipo de mecanismo de gobierno que se basa en un tejido de lazos y redes duraderos que ofrecen recursos claves de pericia, reputacin y legitimacin (Grabher 2004, p. 104). En efecto, tres conjuntos de cambios se entretejen de manera compleja en este punto. El primer conjunto supone una transmutacin de la forma del Estado; un segundo implica el despliegue de nuevas modalidades de Estado; y el tercero est dando lugar a una nueva antropologa de la poltica y articulando nuevos tipos de sujetos polticos. Todos estos cambios dan lugar a nuevos mtodos para gobernar a distancia a travs de normas de eficiencia, agencia y rendicin de cuentas. Todo ello no supone slo un vaciamiento del Estado, sino ms bien nueva modalidad de poder estatal, agencia y accin social, una forma de metagobernanza (Jessop 2002, p. 242). Dicho esto, existe el peligro de que, al concentrarnos en la gobernanza en trminos de lo que puede ser nuevo y diferente, lo que ha permanecido igual pueda ser atendido inadecuadamente y que los acontecimientos que no encajen en el mundo de acuerdo con la gobernanza sean minimizados o ignorados. La cuestin es que aqu no hay un cambio absoluto, sino ms bien un desplazamiento en el equilibrio o combinacin entre los diferentes elementos de gobierno, burocracias, mercados y redes. Es decir, ms redes, ms mercados y menos burocracia! Aunque el trmino se usa de manera un tanto flexible y diversa en ciencia poltica para referir a una desconcertante matriz de fenmenos y prcticas gubernamentales diferentes (Triantafillou 2004b, p. 2), la gobernanza en red supone esencialmente el tratamiento de problemas polticos pblicos aparentemente intratables cuestiones perversas que desafan los esfuerzos por delimitar sus fronteras e identificar sus causas (Rittel y Webber, 1973, p. 167 en Williams, 2002, p. 104) a travs de formas de respuesta gerencial y organizacional en torno a la colaboracin, la asociacin y la interconexin (Williams 2002). Es decir, cada vez ms los gobiernos catalizan a todos los sectores pblico, privado y voluntario hacia la accin para solucionar los problemas de su comunidad (Osborne y Gaebler 1992) y se redefinen como facilitadores comprometidos en cadenas de valor empresariales que trabajan ms a travs de mercados que como hacedores autrquicos que posean, operen y produzcan todo por ellos mismos (Wanna 2009, p. 266). Se trata de un proceso compartido de resolucin de problemas o lo que Wanna

global education policy: austerity and profit

23

llama co-laborar. Janet Newman (2001, p. 108) puntualiza sealando que la bibliografa sobre la gobernanza contempla las redes en trminos de actores plurales comprometidos en un proceso reflexivo de dilogo e intercambio de informacin, o, como agrega Agranoff (2003, p. 28), las redes ofrecen espacios para soluciones colaborativas y movilizar innovaciones. Rhodes defiende en trminos un poco ms fuertes que la gobernanza en red refiere a redes auto-organizadas e inter-organizacionales caracterizadas por la interdependencia, intercambio de recursos, reglas del juego y autonoma significativa con respecto al Estado (Rhodes 1997, p. 15). Los defensores de la gobernanza en red argumentan que esto produce un mayor grado de flexibilidad y ajuste a la complejidad de las condiciones socio-econmicas existentes. Eggers (2008, p. 23) arguye: El modelo de gobierno jerrquico tradicional simplemente no satisface las demandas de esta era compleja en rpida transformacin. Los sistemas burocrticos rgidos con procedimientos de mando-y-control, estrechas restricciones de trabajo y culturas y modelos operacionales que miran hacia el interior, resultan particularmente poco adecuados para afrontar problemas que a menudo trascienden las fronteras organizacionales. Otros autores argumentan que la gobernanza en red y las redes de poltica pueden ofrecer un entorno para la construccin del consenso y, por tanto, limitar la emergencia de resistencias a la implementacin (Marin y Mayntz 1991). Como expresa Besussi (2006, p. 18), la promesa de redes de poltica y del modo de gobernanza que representan producir polticas ms efectivas y legtimas, que no descansen sobre la autoridad y las limitaciones de un cuerpo poltico representativo nico. A causa de todo esto, cada vez ms, los servicios pblicos se prestan a travs de una mezcla de alianzas estratgicas, acuerdos de trabajo conjuntos, redes, asociaciones y muchas otras formas de colaboracin que traspasan las fronteras sectoriales y organizacionales (Williams 2002, p. 103), basadas en relaciones que implican reciprocidad e interdependencia en oposicin a jerarqua e independencia (Peterson 2003, p. 1), aunque esta interdependencia, sea como sealan numerosos comentaristas, claramente asimtrica (vase Rhodes 1997). En trminos generales, esto supone un paso hacia un Estado policntrico y un desplazamiento del centro de gravedad en torno al que se mueven los ciclos polticos (Jessop 1998, p. 32), aunque en muchas de las versiones de la gobernanza en red se omite completamente el papel del sector privado en estos movimientos e interdependencias o simplemente se trata de paso. Y sin embargo, cada vez ms el sector privado es un cons-

24

stephen j. ball

tituyente evidente y significativo de la nueva gobernanza, en educacin y en otros mbitos. Klijn y Koppenjan (2004) se abren camino a travs de esta maleza conceptual con una interpretacin simple que resulta til y pertinente. Explican estos autores que en el mundo de la gobernanza en red se entiende que el gobierno est situado al lado de las empresas y los actores de la sociedad civil en un complejo juego de formacin de polticas pblicas, toma de decisiones e implementacin (Klijn y Koppenjan 2004, p. 25). Algunas versiones de la gobernanza en red relacionan los cambios esbozados anteriormente con un avance hacia formas de gobierno ms democrticas (Srensen y Torfing 2008); mientras otros autores sugieren que la gobernanza en red crea un dficit democrtico, en la medida en que los procesos de poltica y gobierno devienen ms dispersos y ms opacos (March y Olsen 1989). Es decir, las redes polticas no slo difuminan las fronteras entre Estado y sociedad, sino que tambin exponen el proceso de elaboracin de polticas a juegos particulares de poder. El territorio de influencia (Mackenzie y Lucio 2005) sobre la poltica se expande, pero al mismo tiempo los espacios de la poltica se diversifican y disocian. Como resultado, en la medida en que estos nuevos lugares dentro de los contextos de influencia poltica y produccin de texto (Ball 1994) proliferan, se produce un incremento anlogo de la opacidad en la elaboracin de polticas. Dentro de estos nuevos lugares no est claro lo que se puede decir, a quin, dnde, con qu efecto y a cambio de qu (vase Cohen 2004), aunque, hasta cierto punto, esto siempre ha sido as en la formulacin de polticas. Como argumenta Skelcher, estos nuevos parentescos sociales y polticos de la poltica son tambin parte de, y contribuyen a, otras caractersticas relacionadas del Estado en cambio; contribuyen a lo que este autor (1998) llama el Estado de designacin1 y a lo que tambin describe como el Estado abarrotado (Skelcher 2000). Entre ellos, estos descriptores pretenden captar tanto la proliferacin y la fragmentada variedad de agencias y actores implicados en la gobernanza local y regional y en la provisin de servicios pblicos (Sullivan y Skelcher 2004) como dar alguna indicacin del dficit democrtico que se deriva de la creciente participacin de

1 Skelcher utiliza el trmino appointed (nombrado, designado) por oposicin a elegido. [Nota del Traductor]

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

25

quangos, agencias ejecutivas y organizaciones de negocios y voluntarias en la gobernanza de instituciones pblicas y sus dbiles estndares de rendicin de cuentas, auditora y gobernanza (Skelcher 1998, p. 181). Keast, Mandell y Brown (2006, p. 27) argumentan que: Esta situacin conduce a la complejidad de la gobernanza y a lo que se arguye que constituye un mbito poltico atestado en el que diferentes disposiciones de gobernanza, prescripciones polticas, participantes y procesos chocan entre s e incluso compiten los unos con los otros para causar solapamiento y confusin. Shamir (2008, p. 6) argumenta que en este contexto los gobiernos renuncian a parte de sus posiciones privilegiadas de autoridad. Parecera que, cada vez ms, es en estas interacciones descentralizadas, y ms o menos reguladas y coordinadas, entre el Estado y los actores sociales donde se desarrolla la elaboracin de polticas (Coleman y Skogstad 1990, p. 4). Wright-Mills lo denomina una nueva forma de mecanismos institucionales (Wright-Mills 1959, p. 20) y, en efecto, al examinar las redes estamos prestando atencin a la institucionalizacin de las relaciones de poder (Marsh y Smith 2000, p. 6) de una nueva manera. Desde luego, estas relaciones no son del todo nuevas; es su extensin, especificidad, carcter manifiesto y grado de integracin con el gobierno y las organizaciones del Estado lo que es diferente. Es decir, muchos actores y organizaciones diversas, como las que se han sealado con anterioridad, estn ahora implicados de varias formas prosaicas e informales en los asuntos del da a da del Estado por medio de reuniones cara a cara, discusiones, representaciones y consultas. Estn ah para aportar clases particulares de perspectivas, mtodos e intereses que influyan sobre y en el proceso poltico. ste es, pues, el escenario que explorar en relacin con las tendencias actuales en poltica educativa. Tendencias que se manifiestan de maneras diferentes en los marcos nacionales especficos, pero que tambin estn presentes en la creacin de nuevos espacios polticos ms all del Estado-nacin y separados de las organizaciones multi-laterales y las ONG existentes. Sin embargo, los actores y los agentes que conducen y pueblan estas tendencias se unen en muchos puntos, a escala nacional y posnacional. Se unen social, poltica, econmica y discursivamente dentro de redes sociales y constituyen una comunidad poltica epistmica. Son actores, a la vez, diseminadores y beneficiarios de la poltica.

26

stephen j. ball

Epistemologa Poltica

Discursivamente, estas nuevas comunidades polticas estn unidas por una creencia compartida en el fracaso del Estado, en que los servicios pblicos gestionados por el Estado son ineficaces e ineficientes, resistentes a la innovacin y auto-interesados (vase cuadro 2). La cita de Antonio Olmedo (2012) del discurso de Jos Mara Aznar en el Sexto Foro Europeo sobre Educacin y Libertad, organizado por ACADE (una asociacin espaola de centros de educacin privada), es un buen ejemplo de la epistemologa de la reforma. El ex presidente de gobierno (y presidente de la FAES; la Fundacin para el Anlisis y los Estudios Sociales, una institucin que est al servicio de Espaa y al servicio de la idea de libertad individual (Website)) ve en el monopolio del Estado la explicacin de lo que l llama el fracaso del sistema educativo espaol:
La educacin espaola ha sufrido en los ltimos veinte aos el monopolio de proyectos educativos insolventes y fracasados que la han utilizado como instrumento para modelar la sociedad conforme a sus prejuicios. Los jvenes y su futuro son las principales vctimas de estos sueos de ingeniera social. (Aznar 2010, 9)

Por encima y en contra de estos fracasos, dando respuesta a la continua intratabilidad de los problemas sociales, se sita el mercado. Como Bill Gates, creador de la Fundacin Bill y Melinda Gates, mantiene: all donde los Estados, las organizaciones multilaterales y las organizaciones no gubernamentales tradicionales han fracasado, el mercado puede tener xito. Gates prosigue diciendo: el reto aqu es disear un sistema en el que los incentivos de mercado, incluyendo los beneficios y el reconocimiento, conduzcan a esos principios a hacer ms por los pobres (Microsoft News Center, 2008). O en palabras de la Clinton Global Iniciative, fundada por el ex presidente de los Estados Unidos Bill Clinton:
Las corporaciones estn investigando y desarrollando prcticas empresariales mejores que cumplan con las lneas bsicas sociales y medioambientales a la vez que produzcan beneficios. Las organizaciones sin nimo de lucro estn en la vanguardia de modelos basados en la empresa que ofrecen potencial para la sostenibilidad a largo plazo. Los gobiernos estn contribuyendo con sus recursos a estimular y a apoyar los enfoques basados en el mercado. (Clinton Global Initiative, 2010)

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

27

En pocas palabras, los problemas clsicos de desarrollo, calidad y acceso a la educacin, as como cuestiones de equidad de gnero, salud y bienestar y sostenibilidad medioambiental, se afrontan ahora, en marcos nacionales alrededor del globo, por la va de la implicacin de empresas sociales y de negocios en la prestacin de servicios tanto privadamente como en nombre del Estado. En educacin la participacin de organizaciones empresariales sociales y de negocios en la prestacin de servicios educativos del Estado es evidente en EEUU dentro del programa No Child Left Behind (Burch 2009), en Inglaterra en los programas de Academies (Ball 2011a), en Suecia en el programa de Free Schools (Arreman y Holm 2011) y en Espaa en la participacin de escuelas concertadas en la provisin de educacin pblica2. Las alternativas privadas al Estado son tambin cada vez ms evidentes en el establecimiento de escuelas improvisadas en instalaciones comerciales por empresarios locales y la creacin de cadenas de escuelas por compaas multinacionales de educacin, en frica e India y en otros lugares, con relacin a los intentos de sociedades tardamente desarrolladas de alcanzar sus objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio y ofrecer acceso de masas a la educacin bsica. En la actualidad, ya no se sigue donando ayuda internacional y filantrpica como subvencin a los gobiernos y a las ONGs, sino que ms bien se invierte en edu-empresas y en el desarrollo de soluciones de mercado y de empresa social a los problemas educativos. Los mtodos empresariales y las iniciativas de las empresas sociales se propugnan como vas ms efectivas para alcanzar un acceso ms amplio a la educacin y una mejora de su calidad que, se argumenta, la accin de los gobiernos o la tradicional va de la ayuda o la caridad. Este enfoque es a menudo conocido como Capitalismo Social Corporativo, basado en inversiones que responden a retos sociales y dan lugar a empresas sostenibles (Tony Friscia, AMR Research inc. 2009). Los cambios y mudanzas aqu implicados se componen de y son guiados por un complejo conjunto de procesos polticos y econmicos que implican

2 Olmedo (2012) seala que como resultado, Espaa es ahora el cuarto pas de Europa en trminos del nmero de alumnos que asisten a escuelas privadas. Aunque el porcentaje de alumnos de escuelas privadas independientes no es particularmente alto (alrededor de un 5%), la consideracin de la matrcula de las escuelas privadas subvencionadas altera la cifra drsticamente (alrededor de un 30%).

28

stephen j. ball

activismo de empresarios polticos y Redes Transnacionales de Influencia Poltica (como la Atlas Foundation Liberty Network, de la cual es miembro en Espaa la Institucin Futuro), y localmente de think tanks como la FAES (que tiene lazos con la Fundacin Clinton), la Fundacin Burke y, ms especficamente dentro del campo de la educacin, FUNDEL (Fundacin Europea Educacin y Libertad) y ACADE (Olmedo 2012), pero tambin de intereses empresariales, filantropa de riesgo (Gates, Omidyar, IDP), y a travs de la auto-reforma del Estado. Desde luego, aqu el Estado es un jugador crucial, perversamente en algunos sentidos, como constructor del mercado, como iniciador de oportunidades, como re-modelador y modernizador (Ball 2007a, p. 82). De manera creciente los estados estn actuando ms y ms como agentes mercantilizadores colectivos [...] e incluso como actor de mercado mismo (Cerny 1997, p. 267). Como Clarke y Newman mantienen:
Las tipologas establecidas (la distincin entre Estado y mercado o el marco de jerarqua, mercados y redes) no estn a la altura de las nuevas formas organizativas y las disposiciones de gobernanza que se identifican a travs de trminos tales como frontera borrosa o hibricidad. Estos trminos solventan el problema de nombrar estas nuevas disposiciones, pero conllevan sus propios problemas.(http://www.espanet-italia.net/conference2009/ call-for-abstracts/18.php , consultado el 21 de mayo de 2010)

Obtener beneficios de la educacin

A lo largo de los ltimos diez aos he estado explorando e investigando estas tendencias en diferentes frentes, con trabajos sobre las eduempresas en el Reino Unido (Ball 2007b), sobre la filantropa corporativa en el Reino Unido (Ball y Junemann 2012), sobre la emprendedura poltica (Nambissan y Ball 2010), sobre la poltica educativa global a travs de la ptica del neoliberalismo (Ball 2012), y recientemente, con Antonio Olmedo, sobre las redes globales de poltica y filantropa (Ball y Olmedo 2012). Quiero ofrecer aqu dos ejemplos para ilustrar el debate bastante abstracto que he presentado hasta el momento. Los ejemplos implican a Espaa, Inglaterra y Suecia, y unen estos lugares por vas intrincadas (vase cuadro 2). Estos ejemplos tambin representan de manera bastante directa un aspecto de la funcin de lo privado y el beneficio en la poltica

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

29

educativa, es decir, la funcin de las compaas de inversin de capital. Los ejemplos implican tanto la participacin privada en la prestacin de servicios del sector pblico como las alternativas privadas al sector pblico. Cuadro 1. Una compaa de inversin de capital es un gestor de inversiones que realiza inversiones en el capital privado de compaas que opera a travs de una variedad de estrategias de inversin vagamente afiliadas, incluyendo compras financiadas por terceros, capital de riesgo y capital de crecimiento. Descrita a menudo como un patrocinador financiero, cada firma recaudar fondos que se invertirn de acuerdo con una o ms estrategias de inversin especficas. De manera habitual, una firma de capital de inversin recaudar fondos de capital, o fondos de capital de inversin que ofrecen las contribuciones de capital para estas transacciones. Las firmas de capital de inversin recibirn una comisin de gestin peridica as como una participacin en los beneficios logrados (participacin diferida) por cada fondo de capital de inversin gestionado. Las firmas de capital de inversin, con sus inversores, adquirirn una posicin de control o de minora sustancial en una compaa y entonces buscarn maximizar el valor de esta inversin. (Wikipedia) Cognita Schools es un ejemplo del inters y la implicacin de corporaciones internacionales en la educacin. Cognita fue creada en 2004 en el Reino Unido y est respaldada por Englefield Capital LLP (renombrada como Bregal Capital LLP en 2010). Bregal Capital LLP es una compaa de capital de inversin con compromisos de fondos que han ascendido a ms de tres mil millones de euros desde su creacin. Es propiedad de Bregal Investments, una compaa subsidiaria de un holding: Cofra Holding AG. Las actividades empresariales de Cofra incluyen, entre otras, C&A, una operadora de venta de ropa al menor, Redevco, una gran empresa inmobiliaria, e IBI, una operadora de servicios financieros al menor. En 2004 Cognita compr 17 escuelas a Asquith Court, en ese momento la mayor empresa privada de guarderas del Reino Unido, y ahora opera una cadena de 62 escuelas distribuidas por el Reino Unido, Europa y Asia del Sur (Tailandia,

30

stephen j. ball

Singapur y Vietnam), y est buscando activamente nuevas oportunidades de adquisicin (website). En Espaa gestiona siete escuelas en Catalua, Madrid, Murcia y Valencia. En Inglaterra, Cognita ha estado tambin en conversaciones con grupos interesados en establecer Free Schools financiadas por el gobierno. El presidente de Cognita es el ex inspector jefe de Escuelas de Inglaterra, Chris Woodhead. En junio de 2012 el peridico The Guardian informaba de que Cognita estaba siendo investigada por el Departamento de Educacin a causa de las denuncias de fraude al generoso plan de pensiones gestionado por el Estado para los profesores. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/10/ woodhead-schools-firm-pensions-probe?newsfeed=true). El director de Educacin para el Reino Unido y Europa de Cognita es Jim Hudson OBE. Antes de ocupar este cargo en Cognita, en 2005, haba sido director de tres escuelas pblicas, incluyendo la Two Mile Ash Middle School en Milton Keynes. Ha sido tambin asesor del Ministerio de Educacin, la Agencia de Formacin del Profesorado y la Facultad Nacional para el Liderazgo Escolar. Cuadro 2. Progressive Vision : Por qu los progresistas temen tanto al beneficio? El argumento para no permitir a las empresas con nimo de lucro expandirse en sanidad (o educacin) gira en torno a la idea de que los intereses comerciales y el compromiso con la calidad son del alguna manera incompatibles. Cuntas veces hemos odo el lamento de que si se permite a los codiciosos capitalistas gestionar un servicio privado, todos sufriremos? Pero esta expectativa no est corroborada por la evidencia. Por el contrario, una empresa privada que no d al cliente satisfaccin a travs de la calidad y el valor por su dinero fracasar pronto y cerrar, pues los clientes simplemente se alejarn. El Adam Smith Institute el ao pasado investig la obtencin de beneficios en el contexto de las Free Schools. Para ello, entrevistaron a Sir Chris Woodhead, presidente de Cognita, la mayor cadena britnica de educacin con un total de 42 escuelas en Inglaterra. Dijo que cada decisin comercial est guiada por un imperativo educativo fundamental: se traducir lo que vamos a hacer o a no hacer en una mejora en la educacin que nuestros alumnos reciben?... Sabemos que para tener xito tenemos que

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

31

convencer a nuestros padres y madres de que una escuela Cognita debera ser la escuela de su eleccin. Esto significa ofrecer la mejor educacin posible al precio ms competitivo. Progressive Vision es un combativo think tank independiente, dedicado a promover la libertad personal a travs de la defensa de las polticas liberales clsicas en Gran Bretaa. Pensamos que una drstica expansin de la libertad personal conducira no slo a vidas ms plenas para los hombres y mujeres individuales, sino tambin a una sociedad ms pacfica, tolerante y opulenta. Progressive Vision est particularmente interesada en hacer retroceder al Estado all donde ha irrumpido en nuestras vidas cotidianas (Website). Progressive Vision fue fundada en 2007 por Mark Littlewood, el director general del Hayekian Institute of Economic Affairs. Su cofundador fue Shane Frith, quien es director del think tank radicado en Bruselas New Direction. Gestiona una campaa protabaco y es un partidario y socio de la campaa Amend the Smoking Ban, junto con el Adam Smith Institute, Forest y el Manifesto Club. www,progressive-vision.org/blog/why-do-progressives-fearprofit-so-much Olmedo (2012) trata de compaas como Cognita que operan en Espaa, e identifica otras muchas en su trabajo:
En la medida en que el Estado se retira de su funcin como actor principal en la provisin de servicios educativos, nuevos jugadores, de sectores diversos, con intereses diversos, empiezan a surgir. A pesar de que estas empresas todava operan en el sector privado independiente, dada la rpida difusin de los principios de mercado en el seno de la poltica educativa espaola, puede esperarse que estas escuelas empiecen en parte a recibir financiacin pblica parcial, como ya reclaman los defensores del neoliberalismo espaol. (Argadoa 1994; Arruada 1994; Martnez Lpez-Muiz 2001).

En Suecia las edu-empresas ya son activas en el sector pblico y en la recepcin de financiacin pblica. El 20% de los escolares de Suecia se educa ahora en Free Schools financiadas por el Estado, la mayora de las cuales son propiedad de y estn gestionadas por proveedores privados. Existen 900 de tales escuelas con aproximadamente 80.000 alumnos de uno a 18 aos. Dos de estas empresas actan ahora en Inglaterra;

32

stephen j. ball

una, Kunskapsskolan, patrocina y gestiona tres escuelas como parte del programa de Academies, otra, EIS, gan recientemente un contrato de 21 millones de libras a diez aos para gestionar la Breckland Free School en Suffolk. Se ha informado de que otras muchas empresas, incluyendo el mayor proveedor del mundo de educacin independiente, GEMS, estn ya trabajando con grupos en el establecimiento de Free Schools en Inglaterra, y Serco, Pearson (la mayor edu-empresa del mundo que ya est ensayando su modelo escolar en escuelas pblicas de Londres) y Nord Anglia (que tiene un contrato para gestionar escuelas pblicas en Abu Dabi) han expresado tambin su inters en este proceso. En Espaa la FAES ha estado explorando y defendiendo la adopcin del modelo sueco de Free Schools 3. La mayor de las compaas suecas de Free Schools es John Bauer, con escuelas secundarias superiores en 20 lugares, que se especializan en formacin profesional en campos como tecnologa de la informacin, media, emprendedura, salud y actividad fsica, gestin de hoteles y catering. Las escuelas secundarias superiores John Bauer cuentan con alrededor de diez mil alumnos de entre 16 y 19 aos y al menos mil empleados. Aparte de las escuelas suecas, John Bauer gestiona escuelas internacionales en Espaa y facultades de gestin hotelera y catering en la India y Noruega, y tiene otras empresas educativas en China y Tanzania, y actividades de desarrollo inmobiliario en Amrica Central e Indochina. En 2007, la compaa tuvo un volumen de negocio de 757 millones de coronas suecas. En 2008 tres empresas dentro de la organizacin (Drivkraft Vrend, Fourfront, Ultra Education) fueron incluidas en la lista de las empresas de crecimiento ms rpido en Suecia (Affrsvrlden, 2008). Tambin en 2008 la empresa anunci que haba sido invitada por el Ministerio de Educacin en Abu Dabi (en los Emiratos rabes Unidos) para establecer escuelas e introducir un sistema similar al de Suecia para sus escuelas independientes (Ultra Education, 2008). Y John Bauer ha manifestado

3 Bote, V. (2007). El cheque escolar para elegir en libertad la educacin de nuestros hijos. La experiencia sueca. Cuadernos de Pensamiento Poltico, 14, pp. 173-184; Rojas, M. (2009). Libertad de eleccin y pluralismo. Propuestas para una reforma de la educacin espaola inspiradas en la Experiencia Sueca. Ideas para salir de la crisis, 26 http://www.fundacionfaes.org/es/documentos/ ideas_crisis/show/0091

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

33

su intencin de establecer escuelas en otros pases que se considera que presentan un buen potencial para el crecimiento econmico.
En la actualidad estamos asistiendo pues al comienzo de un fuerte crecimiento de la educacin privada en pases como la India, Nepal y Camboya con el fin de atender a las necesidades del creciente nmero de estudiantes. As esta tendencia, que de manera general empez o se fortaleci sobre el ao 2000, crea una fuerte demanda para la educacin privada. [...] el espritu empresarial de la gente que se encuentra tras John Bauer International, siempre dispuesta a participar en nuevos proyectos y a llevar ms all a la organizacin, tanto como un genuino deseo de marcar la diferencia y contribuir al avance de la sociedad a travs del desarrollo educativo, especialmente en los pases menos desarrollados, son las verdaderas razones de nuestra existencia (John Bauer International, website).

Sin embargo, en 2009, John Bauer fue adquirida por la mayor empresa de capital de inversin de Dinamarca, Axcel, que entonces tena inversiones valoradas en 14.000 millones de coronas danesas. Otras reas principales de inversin de Axcel eran la vivienda, la moda y la comida para mascotas. Tras de la compra de John Bauer (JBO), Axcel anunci:
Como parte de la estrategia para el desarrollo continuado de JBO, Axcel planea extender y fortalecer la gestin y la direccin general de la compaa. En la realizacin de esta estrategia, el primer paso ha sido contratar a Alf Johansson como presidente de la junta de directores. Johansson es el ex director de Proffice, una de las mayores empresas de contratacin de personal en Escandinavia con un volumen de negocio de aproximadamente cuatro mil millones de Coronas Suecas. (http://axcel.customers.composite.net/content/us/media/2008/axcel_acquires_jbo_in_sweden)

Estas empresas de educacin existen en un paisaje borroso de beneficio y servicio pblico. Sus empleados entrecruzan el sector pblico y el privado. Para sus propietarios y fundadores, los servicios educativos se sitan entre otras oportunidades de beneficio moda, comida de mascotas, desarrollo inmobiliario, en portafolios de negocio diversificados. En tiempos de austeridad, cuando otros sectores de negocio estn en recesin, los servicios educativos ofrecen atractivas posibilidades alternativas de inversin. El recurso a la externalizacin como forma de recortar el gasto pblico resulta tambin atractivo para los gobiernos, como lo es la flexibilidad de los contratos comparada con la burocra-

34

stephen j. ball

cia. Las compaas son ambiciosas empresas globales en expansin que trabajan a travs de los marcos nacionales, estableciendo prcticas estandarizadas: currculo, pedagoga y evaluacin. En el caso de Suecia parte de la educacin estatal es ahora propiedad de y est gestionada por empresas localizadas en el extranjero. Hasta el momento no nos hemos dado cuenta de la relevancia de que la infraestructura o los servicios educativos nacionales sean de propiedad extranjera y los lmites que esto puede introducir en las opciones de la poltica nacional o la posibilidad de que empresas educativas multinacionales usen su poder para influir en las polticas nacionales en su inters o las posibles consecuencias de la quiebra de empresas para los gobiernos nacionales. Cada uno de estos ejemplos, de formas diferentes pero relacionadas, revela algo del grado de inters por parte de las empresas en la educacin, y del tamao y el valor de los diversos mercados globales de servicios educativos, pero apenas araan la superficie. Aqu vemos tambin el crecimiento, a travs de adquisiciones y fusiones, de marcas educativas globales que en algunos casos ejercen una influencia considerable con relacin a la poltica educativa. Estas empresas y sus representantes desempean su papel en la decidida desestatalizacin y mercantilizacin de la educacin. Las iniciativas, ambiciones y visiones de las empresas someten al sistema educativo a una especie de desgaste econmico que convierte bienes pblicos en bienes privados, poniendo en juego nuevas prcticas, valores y sensibilidades. La empresas desempean roles en el discurso y la infraestructura de la reforma educativa, convirtiendo la poltica educativa en una suerte de lenguaje diferente, investido con diferentes tipos de relaciones, intereses y propsitos. Al mismo tiempo las funciones y la estructura del Estado estn cambiando. De manera creciente los Estados son ms supervisores, contratistas y fijadores de objetivos que responsables de la prestacin del servicio. El Estado se convierte en un regulador y creador de mercado en una compleja red de relaciones con un conjunto diverso de actores y organizaciones.
Conclusin

Lo que he estado tratando de exponer y explorar aqu son, tomando prestada la expresin de Ong (2006 p. 499), nuevos espacios de posibilidades enmaraadas que se constituyen y promulgan en el

poltica educativa global: austeridad y beneficio

35

seno de nuevas redes globales de poltica educativa. Resulta atractivo y en cierto modo trillado, aunque sin embargo cierto, decir que se trata de un terreno de investigacin complejo, inestable y difcil. En muchos aspectos no disponemos siquiera del lenguaje y los conceptos, ni de los mtodos y tcnicas apropiados para investigar estos nuevos paisajes y modos de poltica. Estos desarrollos y cambios en la poltica educativa, que afectan a las formas y a las modalidades de la provisin y la organizacin educativa, han agotado el alcance actual de nuestra agenda de investigacin y necesitamos adaptar y ajustar qu es lo que consideramos como problemas de investigacin para ponernos al da. Necesitamos plantear preguntas diferentes y buscar las respuestas en lugares tambin diferentes. Podemos necesitar de algunas nuevas destrezas y sensibilidades si vamos a enfocar estos desarrollos de manera sensata. En particular, debemos empezar a recurrir a formas de anlisis financiero y de negocios o, para decirlo de otra manera, debemos seguir al dinero. Es decir, los investigadores de la poltica, entre otras cosas, tienen que convertirse en lectores regulares del Financial Times y del Wall Street Journal y de los informes del mercado de acciones, y deben aprender a leer los balances de las empresas. Resultan tambin necesarios mtodos y sensibilidades que estn en consonancia con el movimiento y el flujo ms que con la estructura y el lugar, es decir, tenemos que evitar o ir ms all de las ontologas planas y fijas y pensar fuera de la caja de la poltica nacional. Adems, necesitamos pensar sobre la temporalidad de los procesos y el carcter dinmico de las interrelaciones entre fenmenos heterogneos (Rizvi y Lingard 2010, p. 7), y tambin sobre las dinmicas de cambio en la era global, afectadas por las combinaciones de cambios materiales producidos por las nuevas tecnologas y movilidades, as como por elementos no materiales como los discursos globalmente convergentes y las tradiciones locales de resistencia (p. 8). Esto es lo que Urry (2003, p. 157) llama el giro hacia la movilidad y Beck (2006) denomina una sociologa cosmopolita con un foco en lo interconectado, lo no lineal y dialctico y lo mutable y frgil. Es decir, un foco en la espacializacin de las relaciones sociales, en los viajes y otras formas de movimiento y otras interacciones transnacionales, momentos, lugares, eventos y formas de sociabilidad, con relacin a la poltica y al trabajo poltico. El Estado nacin ya no es el nivel apropiado para el anlisis de la poltica.

References / Bibliografa Agranoff, R. (2003). A New look at the value-adding functions of intergovernmental networks. Paper presented at the 7th National Public Management Research Conference, Georgetown University. Arreman, I.E., & Holm, A.-S. (2011). School as Edubusiness: Four serious players in the Swedish upper secondary school market. Education Inquiry, 2(4), 637-657. Ball, S.J. (1994). Education Reform: A Critical and Post-Structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press. Ball, S.J. (2007a). Education Plc: Understanding private sector participation in public sector education. London: Routledge. Ball, S.J. (2007b). Privatising Education, Privatising Education Policy, Privatising Educational Research: network governance and the competition state. The Routledge Lecture, British Educational Research Association. London. Ball, S.J. (2011a). Academies, policy networks and governance. In H. Gunter (Ed.), The state and education policy: the academies programme. London: Continuum. Ball, S.J. (2011b). Exporting Policy: the growth of multinational education policy businesses and new policy assemblages. In C. Holden, M. Kilkey & G. Ramia (Eds.), Social Policy Review 23: Analysis and debate in social policy, 2011. Britsol: Policy Press. Ball, S.J. (2012). Global Ed. Inc.: new policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. London: Routledge. Beck, U. (2006). Cosmopolitan Vision. Cambridge: Polity Press. [Edicin espaola: La mirada cosmopolita a la guerra es la paz. Barcelona: Paids, 2005]. Bessusi, E. (2006). Mapping European Research Networks. Working Papers Series No. 103 Retrieved 07.08.09, from Mapping European Research Networks. Burch, P.E. (2009). Hiddens Markets: The New Educational Privatization. New York: Routledge.

38

bibliografa

Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Volume 1 (2nd ed.). Malden: Blackwell. [Edicin espaola: La era de la informacin: economa, sociedad y cultura. Madrid: Alianza, 2001]. Cerny, P. (1997). Paradoxes of the competition state: The dynamics of political globalisation. Government and Opposition, 32(2), 251-274. Cohen, N. (2004). Pretty Straight Guys. London: Faber and Faber. Coleman, W.D., & Skogstad, G. (Eds.). (1990). Policy Communities and Public Policy in Canada. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman. Eggers, W. (2008). The changing nature of government: network governance. In J. OFlynn & J. Wanna (Eds.), Collaborative governance: a new era of public policy in Australia? (pp. 23-28). Canberra: ANU E Press. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge: Polity. [Edicin espaola: Modernidad e identidad del yo. Barcelona: Pennsula, 1995]. Grabher, G. (2004). Learning in projects, remembering in networks? Communality, sociality, and connectivity in project ecologies. European Urban and Regional Studies, 11(2), 103-123. Hood, C. (1990). Beyond the public bureaucracy state: public administration in the 1990s. London: LSE. Jessop, B. (1998). The Rise of Governance and the risks of failure. International Social Science Journal, 155(1), 29-45. Jessop, B. (2002). The Future of the Capitalist State. Cambridge: Polity. Keast, R., Mandell, M., & Brown, K. (2006). Mising state, market and network governance modes: the role of government in crowded policy domains. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 9(1), 27-50. Klijn, E-H. & Mandell, Hopperijan, J. (2004). Managing Uncertainties in Networks. London: Routledge. Mackenzie, R., & Lucio, M.M. (2005). The Realities of Regulatory Change: Beyond the Fetish of Deregulation. British Journal of Sociology, 39(3), 499-517. March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: the organisational basis of politics. New York: Free Press. Marsh, D., & Smith, M. (2000). Understanding policy networks: towards a dialectical approach. Political studies, 48, 4-21. Nambissan, G.B., & Ball, S.J. (2010). Advocacy networks, choice and private schooling of the poor in India. Global Networks, 10(3), 324-343.

bibliografa

39

Newman, J. (2001). Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society. London: Sage. Olmedo, A.J. (2012). Policy makers, market advocates and edu-businesses: New and renewed players in the Spanish education policy arena. Journal of Education Policy. Ong, A. (2006). Mutations in Citizenship. Theory, Culture and Society, 23(2-3), 499-531. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Re-inventing Government. Reading: Mass: Addison-Wesley. [Edicin espaola: Reinvencin del gobierno. Barcelona: Paids, 1994]. Peterson, J. (2003). Policy networks. Vienna: Institute for Advanced Studies. Rhodes, R.A.W. (1988). Policy networks, territorial communities and British government, paper presented to the Workshop on Public Policy in Northern Ireland: Adoption or Adaptation, Policy Research Institute. University of Ulster, 4 March 1988. Rhodes, R.A.W. (1997). Understanding Goverance: Policy Networks, Goverance, Reflexivity and Accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing Education Policy. London: Routledge. Shamir, R. (2008). The age of responsibilitization: on market-embedded morality. Economy and Society, 37(1), 1-19. Skelcher, C. (1998). The Appointed State. Buckingham: Open University Press. Skelcher, C. (2000). Changing Images of the State - Overloaded, Hollowed-out, Congested. Public Policy and Administration, 15(3), 3-19. Skelcher, C. (2007). Democracy in Collaborative Spaces: Why context matters in researching governance networks. In J. Torfing (Ed.), Democratic Network Governance in Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Srensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2008). Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Sullivan, H., & Skelcher, C. (2004). Working Across Boundaries (Government Beyond the Centre). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Triantafillou, P. (2004a). Addressing network governance through the concepts of governmentality and normalization. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 26, 489-508. Triantafillou, P. (2004b). Conceiving network governance: the potential of the concepts of governmentality and normalization: Centre for Democratic Network Governance.

40

bibliografa

Urry, J. (2003). Social networks, travel and talk. British Journal of Sociology, 54(2), 155-175. Wanna, J. (2009). Political Chronicles, Commonwealth of Australia July to December 2008. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 55(2), 261-315. Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. Public Administration, 80(1), 103-124. [Edicin espaola: La elite del poder. Mxico: Fondo de Cultura Econmica, 1969]. Wright-Mills, C. (1959). The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press. [Edicin espaola: La elite del poder. Mxico: Fondo de Cultura Econmica, 1969].