Article

Innovative Financing of Higher Education for the Future

5(1) 61–74
Higher Education: ©2018 The Kerala State
Higher Education Council
Changing Options SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
and Implications DOI: 10.1177/2347631117738644
http://hef.sagepub.com

Jinusha Panigrahi1

Abstract
With the onset of new public management, there is a shift in the methods of
financing of higher education institutions across the countries of the world,
particularly emerging market economies, from public financing to private financing
of higher education.1 Many countries adopted this shift very quickly while others
have moved towards a gradual shift in adopting new systems to various extents.
With the gradual decline in public financing of higher education institutions in
developing countries like India, due to the competing demand for public funds
and thereby privatization of public higher education institutions to share the cost
of higher education to meet the growing demand for higher education, there
are many new innovative methods that are adopted to finance higher education
institutions. Further, the massification of higher education has encouraged the
expansion of private higher education institutions to meet the sudden burst in
the demand for higher education.
The article discusses the issues and challenges in implementing the innovative
methods of financing across the developed and developing countries with special
regard to their implementation in a developing country like India.

Keywords
Higher education, public financing, innovative methods, public higher education
institutions

1
Assistant Professor, Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education, National University of
Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, India.

Corresponding author:
Jinusha Panigrahi, Assistant Professor, Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education, National
University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi - 110016, India.
E-mail: jinusha.jnu@gmail.com
62 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

Introduction
Financing of higher education in the world has undergone several transformations
which is different for different countries. Further, the transformation and dimen-
sions vary between developed and developing countries. While financing of higher
education is by the government in the developed world, it is gradually moving
towards private financing in developing countries. The gradual move towards mas-
sification of higher education and therefore the resulting expansion in enrolment in
higher education across developed and developing countries have necessitated a
gradual increase in the financing of higher education. But, the competing demand
for public funds from other priority sectors such as health, defence and in fact uni-
versalization of elementary education has compelled the government as well as
higher education institutions (HEIs) to explore alternative and innovative methods
to finance higher education. In the recent past, many developed countries and a
few developing countries have already explored new innovative methods such as
encouraging funds from philanthropists, charitable organizations and corporates,
investing on mutual funds, bonds of financial institutions and academia and industry
linkages etc. to generate resources. For the majority of developing and underdevel-
oped countries, the traditional alternative methods of financing such as student fees,
low-interest educational loans and voucher systems such as student support system
to finance their education as per their choice continue to complement the existing
public sources of funding (Panigrahi, 2010). Some methods less widely explored by
the HEIs in these countries are alumni funds, research projects and consultancy
activities, introduction of new courses and so on. The new innovative methods of
financing are challenging for such developing countries; as for their implementa-
tion, there is the need of restructuring the economy and education system before
implementing these methods successfully.

Background
The report on ‘Investing in Education for a Changing World’ by the International
Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity states that for creating
the learning generation, there is the need of US $3 trillion annual education spend-
ing in low- and middle-income countries by 2030 compared to the current level of
US $1.2 trillion (United Nations, 2016) due to the rapid expansion of enrolment
in education. Higher education plays a significant role in creating the opportunity
for learning globally. The growing demand for higher education in a globalized
knowledge economy has resulted in the rapid expansion of higher education
enrolments. Taking four different time periods starting from 1985 to 2014, the
expansion in enrolment is visible from Table 1 both in developed and in develop-
ing countries. While among the OECD countries, the USA has got the maximum
expansion followed by Sweden and the UK and from developing countries, it is
the Russian Federation followed by Brazil, Indonesia and India. The underdevel-
oped countries have very low gross enrolment ratio (GER) and yet a long way to
go to reach that massive level of enrolment.
Panigrahi 63

Table 1. Gross Enrolment Ratio in Tertiary Education (%)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Bangladesh 8.61 10.52 — 13.28 13.39
Brazil 35.56 37.04   43.46 45.24
Burundi 2.55 2.71 3.15 2.98 3.67
Cameroon 7.82 8.96 11.04 11.93 12.91
Ghana 8.65 9.02 — 12.08 12.18
India 15.12 16.1 17.91 22.86 24.37
Indonesia 20.7 23.06 24.2 26.5 30.66
Madagascar 3.24 3.44 3.61 4.01 4.09
Mali 5.32 5.86 6.04 6.34 6.87
Russian Federation 74.96 75.43 — 76.5 76.11
Sweden 71.12 71.45 74.68 73.95 69.62
UK 56.87 58.15 59.07 58.99 59.22
USA 85.01 88.58 94.23 96.32 94.84
Source: UNESCO (2017).

With massification of higher education in many countries, the challenges of

funding also accumulated further. Whether the expansion is commensurate with
available resources of the respective country is an issue to be explored. As indi-
cated by Table 2, there is a gradual increase in public financing of higher educa-
tion in the developed and developing countries with exceptions of Ghana,

Table 2. Expenditure on Tertiary Education as a Percentage of the GDP

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Bangladesh 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.3
Brazil 0.84 0.87 0.93 0.96 0.95
Burundi 1.1 1.16 1.23 1.05 1.2
Cameroon 0.26 0.3 0.3 0.46 0.23
Ghana 1.49 1.27 1.44 1.07 1.47
India — 1.21 1.24 1.33 1.24
Indonesia 0.32 0.43 0.45 — 0.59
Madagascar 0.45 0.49 — 0.38 0.41
Mali 0.55 0.61 0.69 0.87 0.71
Russian Federation 0.95 — — — 0.82
Sweden 1.72 1.93 1.92 1.89 1.94
UK 0.78 0.74 0.95 1.26 —
USA 1.24 1.19 1.39 1.36 1.48
Source: UNESCO (2017).
64 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

Cameroon and Madagascar. It indicates the growing/declining engagement/with-

drawal by the government.
Similarly, when the expenditure on different levels of education as a percent-
age of GDP is observed, it shows the adjustment or shift in financing between
different levels of education in different time periods revealing the policy changes
and priorities in the financing of different sectors of education across countries.
While the total education expenditure of Sweden has shown a steady growth rate,
the share of secondary education expenditure has declined but higher education
has got a prominence in public expenditure. Countries like the Russian Federation,
the USA and Bangladesh have shown almost a slow and stagnant growth in public
expenditure and not so encouraging growth in expenditure in the higher education
sector. There is some moderate increase in investment on education including
higher education by the UK, Brazil, India and South Africa. The less developed
countries’ share of investment on education as a percentage of the GDP is declin-
ing (with very low GER) but higher education has got an increased share.
Whether the expected public financing is at coherence with the massive enrol-
ments, the per student expenditure data is examined to see the trend. Table 3
shows the trend of government expenditure per tertiary student as a percentage of
GDP per capita. It also shows the reduced/increased involvement of the private
(individuals/institutions) sector in expenditure on higher education of the respec-
tive countries.
India is showing a decline in GDP per capita due to the massification of higher
education as the expenditure on tertiary education falls short of the growth of
rapid expansion in enrolment.

Table 3. Government Expenditure Per Tertiary Student as a Percentage of GDP Per

Capita

  2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Bangladesh 30.83 24.49 — 16.57 24.14
Brazil 27.4 28.1 28.08 27.85 26.53
Burundi 444.62 436.16 — 356.64 328.6
Cameroon 34.69 34.4 28 39.85 18.46
Ghana 177.83 146.17 — 90.85 129.34
India — 78.1 72.3 61.51 54.32
Indonesia 16.97 21.05 21.81 — 23.29
Madagascar 143.53 146.38 — 94.99 102.6
Mali 115.16 117.44 129.56 150.49 117.2
Russian Federation — — — 14.64 —
Sweden 42.39 39.61 38.47 40.64 43.14
UK 18.97 23.92 31.72 — 36.15
USA 18.89 20.88 20.08 21.95 21.17
Source: UNESCO (2017).
Panigrahi 65

The deficiency in the financing of higher education is catered through various

alternative sources and innovative methods of financing. But, the methods of
financing of higher education vary across countries. While the innovative methods
explored by developed countries and a few developing countries are very recent,
the innovative methods experienced by most of the developing and underdeveloped
countries are mostly traditional. Therefore, the backdrop of innovative financing
is showing a transition from fundamental resource mobilization mechanisms to a
varied range of financing instruments with inbuilt capacity to solve the issues, if
any, which emerged after implementation. Apart from traditional methods like
student financing (fees, loans, HCC, etc.), consultancy activities and research,
new short-term courses, copy rights and similar methods basically followed across
different countries, there are many new methods in education that are explored by
various countries in the world.
According to the study ‘Innovative Financing for Development’ (2014), an
innovative method of financing not only complements the existing government
fund but also creates a sustainable source of capital (that rules out instability and
uncertainty) for investment in developmental activities. Such investments have a
definite purpose, flexible long gestation periods according to the needs of the
project/investment enabling the sharing of risks among various stakeholders.
In 2001, bonds and guarantees focused primarily on resource mobilization by
leveraging the balance sheets of international finance institutions. Instead of pro-
viding funding at the present time, public institutions either promised to repay
loans in the future or accepted the risk that projects may not succeed, in order to
encourage commercial investment. In recent years, however, instruments through
which the private sector shares the risks and rewards from development have
gained more attention. This is considered as an important paradigm shift in inno-
vative methods of financing. Some other such methods are as follows.

Diaspora Bond
As stated in his study, Bradlow (2006) discusses elaborately the emergence of
the diaspora bond as an innovative method of financing when there are financial
constraints in funding the development activities of any country. Though the
method is not widely used, Israel (since 1951), India (since 1991), Srilanka
(in 2001), South Africa and Lebanon are some of the countries who have been on
the forefront in raising hard currency financing from their respective diasporas
living abroad (Bradlow, 2006). As per the above stated study, bonds issued by the
Development Corporation for Israel is over US $25 billion, State Bank of India
has raised over US $11 billion and the Government of Sri Lanka has raised an
amount of US $580 million. Diaspora bonds are basically a kind of long dated
security which can’t be redeemed before maturity compared to the foreign cur-
rency deposits (FCDs) that are capable of withdrawal even before maturity.
Hence, the diaspora bond is a better option than FCDs as an investment for future.
The diaspora bond is a kind of philanthropic contribution for one’s country’s
development driven by a sense of nationalism. So, in this way, the two parties
66 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

involved in the investment process such as the concerned country and the diaspo-
ras are benefited, in receiving a continuous flow of capital to further invest in
development purposes like education and to distribute the composition of their
asset for future returns.

Social Impact Bonds

A social impact bond (SIB) is a contract in which socially focused investors
finance the provision of a specific service, programme or series of programmes
(normally delivered by venture capitalists or social enterprise organizations), in
return for a pay out, which is dependent on specific outcomes being achieved as a
result of the intervention (Griffiths & Meinicke, 2014). It is considered as a meas-
ure to substantiate the fund crunch of the government to invest in necessary public
activities for the development purposes of the country. The payments are conditioned
upon the achievement of pre-defined targets or outcomes of the public service.
In education the major target areas of funding are to meet the education needs
of the young outside the purview of education, employment or training, as well as
meeting special educational needs of children or young people. There are 15 SIBs
in the UK, 4 in the USA, 2 in Australia and 1 in the Netherlands (Griffiths &
Meinicke, 2014).
The advantage of SIB is that usually while the risk for the outcome is borne by
the investors, the local authority won’t be paying for the targeted service in case
of failure in achieving the targeted outcome. But, on the contrary, this innovative
method of financing necessitates the availability of huge resources, involves para-
mount cost and therefore a commitment from the local authority.

Debt Swaps
The debt swap is a popular instrument of debt relief since the 1980s and is also
looked at as an innovative method of financing for development activities of the
debtor country, with the recent increase in debt swapping for the education sector
as part of Millennium Development Goals.
As the UNESCO report points out in its study (UNESCO, 2011), in case of
debt swap, the creditor forgives debt on the condition that the debtor makes avail-
able some specified amount of local currency funding to be used for specific
developmental purposes.
Before the adoption of the debt swap, it is necessary to prepare the ground in
the recipient county to make the debt swap very effective. The establishment of an
additional fiscal space is desirable for which it should be taken care of that the
expenditure due to swap must not exceed what would have been the expenditures
in the repayment of debt. Debt swap would be successful with a cooperative
approach, whereby debt-for-education supporters team up with other interests in
a common debt-for-development funding effort, and in the next stage, sectoral
allocation of funds needs to be worked out to conform to the development plans
of debtor countries (UNESCO, 2011).
Panigrahi 67

The above mentioned study states that, Spain and Ghana entered into debt-for-
human development swaps in 2009 and many non-Paris Club and commercial cred-
itors already involved in debt relief operations and South-South cooperation have
become even more important in today’s interconnected world. All such changes as
stated in the study to explore the untapped potential and get involved in large-scale
debt swap initiatives which require greater transparency over their respective debt
relief policies and attitudes towards debt-for-development swaps.
After debt swaps, and hence when debt is forgiven, it gives a boost to the
domestic bonds that contribute towards the long-term stream of savings to the
recipient country. Domestic bonds are supported by private sector donors to
provide funding over a period of time. It is argued that domestic bonds can also
be issued based upon the securitization of future streams of revenue such as
college tuition payments, student loan payments and student housing expendi-
tures so that graduates will pay from their future earnings after the completion of
their course, or their parents would pay and it can be used by the respective
country’s government for funding new infrastructure development activities in
tertiary education (UNESCO, 2011).

Debt Conversion Development Bonds

The pension fund savings as well as savings with the insurance companies are
domestic assets; those can be utilized for long-term investment. In developing
countries, it has been assessed that there is more than US$3 trillion worth assets
held by such kinds of institutional investors (UNESCO, 2011).
UNESCO (2011) defines Debt Conversion Development Bonds (DCDBs) as
the domestic bonds issued on the basis of savings achieved through debt conver-
sions and structured as follows:

Firstly, one or more creditors agree to forgive specific debts in exchange for a commit-
ment from the debtor country’s government to periodically place into a special account
(called the Debt Conversion Account (DCA)) at their central bank or treasury the local
currency saved from not having to make principal and interest payment on the debt, sec-
ondly, the payments by the government into the DCA (the ‘counterpart funds’) would
be in local currency (which would save the country from having to utilize its foreign
exchange reserves) and would be made over time in accordance with the original debt
service schedules of the converted debts. The government could then issue local cur-
rency bonds (DCDBs) which would be repaid from the stream of future payments going
into the DCA. Depending on the amounts of debt swaps in each county, the time profile
of the future stream of counterpart funds, and debt market conditions, one or more
DCDBs could be issued in each country, varying in size, tenor, interest rate and issuance
date as appropriate.

The returns from such investments are directed towards infrastructure develop-
ment rather than other recurring expenses. While the government of the respective
developing country would be in charge of these DCDBs and its monitoring, the
corresponding investors/buyers of these bonds are expected to be financial institu-
tions, private individual investors or foreign investors.
68 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

Financing Higher Education in India

Financing of higher education in India has gone through various transitions as a
result of various policy initiatives by the central government from time to time.
According to the suggestions and recommendations by various committees and
commissions set up by the government itself from time to time, they have influ-
enced the methods of financing of the education sector, and hence the higher
education sector in particular has evolved accordingly with various policy guide-
lines. The Indian higher education system has transformed from a government-
guided higher education system to a market-driven massified higher education
system (Varghese, 2015).
Financing of education has been an important concern as a policy measure
much before independence. The recommendations related to financing education
by various committees are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Committees and Commissions and Transformation in Funding Methods in the

Indian Higher Education System

Committee/Commission Period Recommendations

B.G. Kher Committee 1939 Methods of financing education
Commission on University Post- Educational finance policy
Education Independence
Kothari Commission 1964–1966 Issues specific to states in financing
education
National Policy on Education 1968 Alternative financing
Study Group for Resource 1970 Alternative sources of mobilization
Mobilization in Education
National Policy of Education 1986 Allocation of resources, financial
management
Justice Punnaya Committee 1992–1993 UGC funding of HEIs and cost sharing by
Report increasing fees
Conference for Education 1993 Review of resources for education
for All
Swaminathan Committee 1994 Cost-sharing measures in technical
Report education and university-industry linkages
Ambani-Birla Committee 2000 Academia industry linkages and public-
Report private partnerships to generate
additional resources
CABE Committee Report 2005 Allocation and utilization of resources
and generation through research
collaboration activities
National Knowledge 2006 Improved management of HEIs and
Commission promotion of intellectual property rights
(Table 4 Continued)
Panigrahi 69

(Table 4 Continued)

Committee/Commission Period Recommendations

Yashpal Committee Report 2009 Encouraging Fund raising through
philanthropy, alumni and other non-
governmental sources and foreign
university participation
N.R. Narayana Murthy 2012 Corporate sector participation in
Committee Report higher education to further the market
participation for improving efficiency and
autonomy
Source: Compiled by author from various reports mentioned in the table.

The B.G. Kher Committee gave emphasis on the different methods of financing
education. The Kothari Commission focused on issues specific to states in the
financing of education. The National Education Policy of 1968 for the first time
emphasized on alternative methods of financing along with government sources. A
study group for resource mobilization was formed in 1970 for recommendations in
alternative sources of financing. The process of recommendations for mobilization
of resources through various alternative innovative methods of financing as comple-
mentary to government financing continued for the following years. Punnaya
Committee report, Swaminathan Committee as well as Ambani-Birla Committee
gave major recommendations on cost sharing with the students by hiking of fees and
generation of resources by academia-industry linkages, public-private partnerships
and so on. CABE committee and National Knowledge Commission stressed upon
the generation of resources by HEIs through research activities and intellectual
property rights, respectively. The Yashpal Committee report went a few steps ahead
and suggested for encouraging fund raising through philanthropy, alumni and other
non-governmental sources and foreign university participation. The N.R. Narayan
Murthy report during the period of growing participation of private HEIs suggested
corporate sector participation in higher education to further the market participation
for improving efficiency and autonomy.
So, the gradual transition of higher education from a public entity towards the
privatization of public HEIs and the growth of private sector has undergone vari-
ous policy recommendations.
The share of public expenditure as a percentage of GDP across different levels
of education in India gives some understanding regarding the changing perspec-
tives of higher education financing compared to other sectors in recent years. As
shown in Table 5, the share of university and higher education have declined in
recent years compared to primary and secondary levels of education.
While the share of total expenditure on education by state government and
union territories has experienced a minor increase since 2012–2013, the share of
expenditure on university and higher education as a percentage of the GDP has
declined in 2014–2015. Similarly, the expenditure by the central government on
university and higher education has not experienced any significant change after
Table 5. Public Expenditure on Education as Percentage of GDP in India

State/UTs Centre Total

  2011– 2012– 2013– 2014– 2011– 2012– 2013– 2014– 2011– 2012– 2013– 2014–
2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015
(RE) (A) (RE) (BE) (RE) (A) (RE) (BE) (RE) (A) (RE) (BE)
Elementary education 1.36 1.22 1.25 1.42 0.41 0.39 0.38 0.4 1.76 1.6 1.63 1.82
Secondary education 0.94 0.81 0.86 0.87 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.11 1.05 0.9 0.95 0.99
University and higher education 0.53 0.44 0.49 0.44 0.3 0.19 0.2 0.22 0.82 0.63 0.69 0.65
Adult education 0.01 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Technical education 0.29 0.33 0.36 0.32 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.25 0.54 0.56 0.57 0.57
Total (Education) 3.12 2.8 2.96 3.06 1.07 0.9 0.9 0.99 4.18 3.7 3.86 4.04
Source: MHRD (2014, 2016).
Note: RE (Revised Estimates), A (Actual), BE (Budget Estimate).
Panigrahi 71

a downfall in 2012–2013, compared to the share of total expenditure and expendi-

ture on other sectors by the centre in the same period. Similar is the case with
technical education. Therefore, looking at the relative share of higher education as
a percentage of GDP, alternative and innovative methods of financing are experi-
mented which takes its roots from the period of 1980s during the adoption of
Structural Adjustment Policy.
Various alternative methods of financing are explored in India from time to
time with their inherent limitations (Chattopadhyay, 2007). The suggestions of
Punnaya Committee Report as well as Swaminathan Committee Report as men-
tioned in the previous section in Table 4 were materialized in the form of various
cost-sharing measures and income-generating activities (Panigrahi, 2017).

Innovative Financing in India

Income Generating Measures Explored in India
Courses and Programmes
Short-term courses and programmes are suggested to be designed by university
departments to generate some resources without any negative implications to their
respective academic activities and core objectives. Accordingly, this would con-
tribute towards the development of these departments which would promote their
academic activities and make them competitive.
Research Programmes and Consultancy
Through the undertaking of various relevant research and consultancy activities
for central or state departments, industrial units and the private sector, the univer-
sities and colleges can generate certain resources to contribute for infrastructural
development of the respective HEIs, which otherwise would be difficult when
there are shortages of public funding in the case of many HEIs after meeting their
urgent expenses.
Alumni Association
Many universities, in particular central universities, have got eminent alumnus
who can contribute to their capacity to their alma mater for its growth and devel-
opment. The growing enrolment in recent years has necessitated the expansion of
HEIs which is difficult if there is a crunch in resources from government grants.
Alumni associations need to be strengthened for this purpose with regular meet-
ings and get-togethers.
Corpus Fund
Corpus fund is a commonly practised method in case of private-aided HEIs. But,
this can be a feature of public HEIs if certain part of the resources generated from
various innovative methods is saved as a corpus fund. The interest generated
from such funds can be used for the development of the respective HEI.
Endowments from individuals and corporate persons may also be added to such
funds to grow and contribute to the HEIs.
72 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

Diaspora Bond
The State Bank of India has taken certain initiatives in the recently renowned
innovative method of financing like diaspora bonds. The study by Ketkar and
Ratha (2009) has found the growing reliance of India on this new innovative
method of financing. As per the study,

on three separate occasions the Indian government has tapped its diaspora base of non-
resident Indians for funding: India Development Bonds (IDBs) following the balance-
of-payments crisis in 1991 ($1.6 billion), Resurgent India Bonds (RIBs) following the
imposition of sanctions in the wake of nuclear testing in 1998 ($4.2 billion), and India
Millennium Deposits (IMDs) in 2000 ($5.5 billion). Unlike the Jewish diaspora, the
Indian diaspora provided no patriotic discount on RIBs and only small ones on IMDs.
When RIBs were sold in August 1998 to yield 7.75 percent on U.S. dollar-denominated
bonds, the yield on BB-rated U.S. corporate bonds was 7.2 percent. Diaspora bonds
are as attractive to issuers as they are to investors. From the issuer’s point of view,
they are a reliable source of financing during times of difficulty. From the investor’s
perspective, they offer an attractive alternative for diversifying risk. It is expected to be
implemented in case of higher education too given its own limitations.

Conclusion
Though India has explored the traditional methods of innovative financing of higher
education, given the massification of higher education and the pressing requirement
of increased allocation to higher education, there is a concern over exploring the
new methods without being prepared at the ground level for implementation of
these innovative methods of financing of higher education. With concern over
access to higher education by a diversified student population in India and concern
over quality and regulatory mechanism, that too with growing private providers of
higher education, private initiatives to finance need to be studied further to opti-
mally utilize the investment done on higher education financing. But the role of the
government would always be inevitable for monitoring and regulating such flows
equally to different streams within higher education.

Notes
1. The article is a revised version of the paper presented at the YES Institute National
Convening on Developing a Credit Market for Higher Education in India, 4 August
2016, at India International Centre, New Delhi.

References
Bradlow, Daniel D. (2006). An Experiment in Creative Financing to Promote South African
Reconciliation and Development. American University, Washington College of Law.
Chattopadhyay, S. (2007). Exploring alternative sources of financing higher education.
Economic and Political Weekly, 42(42), 4251–4259.
Griffiths, A., & Meinicke, C. (2014). Introduction to social impact bonds and early
intervention—Initial report. Early Intervention Foundation, ADVICE, London.
Panigrahi 73

Guarnaschelli, S., Lampert, S., Marsh, E., & Johnson, L. (2014). Innovative financing
for development: Scalable business models that produce economic, social, and
environmental outcomes. Dalberg Global Development Advisors. Retrieved from
http://www.citifoundation.com/citi/foundation/pdf/innovative_financing_for_
development.pdf
Ketkar, S. L., & Ratha, D. (2009). Innovative financing for development. Washington, DC:
The World Bank.
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). (2014). Analysis of budgeted
expenditure on education 2010–11 to 2012–13. New Delhi: GOI.
———. (2016). Analysis of budgeted expenditure on education 2012–13 to 2014–15. New
Delhi: GOI.
Panigrahi, J. (2010). Determinants of educational loans by commercial banks in India:
Evidence and implications based on a sample survey. Journal of Educational Planning
and Administration, XXIV(4), 379–400.
———. (2017). Resource allocation and innovative methods of financing higher education
in India. In N. V. Varghese & C. M. Malish (Eds), CPRHE research papers 6 (pp. 1–44).
New Delhi: NUEPA.
UNESCO. (2011). Education final report for UNESCO advisory panel of experts on debt
swaps and innovative approaches to education financing. United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0021/002111/211162E.pdf
UNESCO. (2017). Data extracted on 28 September 2017 09:50 UTC (GMT) from UIS
Statistics. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved
from http://data.uis.unesco.org/
United Nations. (2016). The Learning Generation, Investing in Education for a Changing
World. A Report by the International Commission on Financing Global Education
Opportunity. Retrieved from http://report.educationcommission.org/downloads/
Varghese, N. V. (2015). Challenges of massification of higher education in India. In
N. V. Varghese & C. M. Malish (Eds), CPRHE research papers 1 (pp. 1–47). New
Delhi: NUEPA.

Author’s Bio-sketch

Jinusha Panigrahi is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Policy Research in

Higher Education (CPRHE, an autonomous centre of MHRD, India), National
University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA), New Delhi.
Currently, she is the Co-Chair Person (Elect) of Comparative and International
Education Society, the USA. She has been a principal investigator and research
project coordinator to a University Grants Commission funded major research
project on ‘Financing of Higher Education Institutions in India’ at NUEPA. She is
also a coordinator to the MHRD project on ‘Concentration and Over Supply of
Higher and Technical Institutions in India’. Her major activities at NUEPA involve
research in economics of education, financing and internationalization of higher
education, and teaching. She has developed modules on Financing of Higher
Education for International Diploma in Higher Education.

She has also published articles in various journals like Asian Economic Review,
Higher Education for Future, Journal of Educational Planning and Administration,
74 Higher Education for the Future 5(1)

Economic Affairs and so on. She coordinated two international seminars on

‘Massification of Higher Education in Large Academic Systems’and ‘Innovations
in Financing of Higher Education’organized by CPRHE/NUEPA in collaboration
with British Council. She is the recipient of SUN Fellowship awarded by Central
European University, Budapest to participate in the workshop on ‘Innovative
Methods of Financing’ organized by the Central European University, Budapest
in collaboration with the Open Society Foundation, the USA.