Scope and Limits of

Public Private Partnerships in Pakistan-

the Political Economy of Education

International HRD Congress

1-2 October 2004, Islamabad

Attacking Poverty thru Public Private

Partnerships

By Baela Raza Jamil

Chairperson
Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi (ITA)
Quotable Quotes…food for
thought
 "There is in our time no well educated literate
population that is poor, there is no illiterate
population that is other than poor." —
John Kenneth Galbraith

 "Public-private partnership models are a critical

component for sustainable development."
2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development,Johannesburg,

2
Section 1 : Historical Patterns.
The Political Economy of Education
 Private Partnerships are an old tested public policy instrument since 1854 in an
Imperial setting: Grants in Aid as conditional cash transfers(CTT) to educational
enterprise in urban and rural areas ..

 Up to 1972 in the post colonial phase grants in aid continued

 1972-1977 : Nationalization..seduction of the common citizen, constituency building….

Equalizing education opportunities for all.. Islamic Socialism. Excluding partnerships through
national state intervention. An unsustainable proposition in education

 1979-1989 : Economic burden of poor quality nationalized education, dissatisfied polity.

Invoking the private sector for secular and non-secular options . Legitimizing the praetorian
state

 1989-1999 : 1990 Jomtien “Education for All” commitments . .state experiments in

Education Foundations and Civil Society Innovations.. Private sector mushrooms …lassez
faire in education.. Experimentations with democracy and multiple partners

 Post-1999 : Governance Crises and Poverty Challenge. Dakar 2000 EFA Goals and MDGs:
Multiple macro-level responses including ESR and emergence of PPP Solutions ..
Globalization, markets and partnerships (developing and developed countries) seeking the
valued added from Govt, CSOs, Philanthropy and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
and in Pakistan legitimacy for a managed democracy ..

3
 The New State and Education
Options
Three Roles of the New State
As a provider
for public &
Financier
non-state options An emerging role

Facilitator
Regulator

For Policies, Implementation &

of Incentives for PPP…but
uneven capacities

Negotiating Asymmetries between Equity and Privatization/private sector solutions

through PPP Options and within Decentralized setting 4
Education Sector Reforms Action
Plan 2001/2-2004/5
 PPPs are seen as an underpinning and thrust
area in ESR.
 Measurable targets of PPPs, for example,
- Raising the number of PPPs from 200
institutions in 2000, to 16,000 in 2005.

 Restructuring the Education Foundations into more

autonomous institutions to promote PPP

5
ESR: Access to Quality, Improved Service Delivery

 Targets 2001-2005
 Provision of incentive package for the private sector
 Involvement of the private sector in the management of under-utilized public
sector institutions
 Provision of grants and soft loans through restructured Education Foundations
 Adopt School Program replicated across the country
 Community Participation Project (CPP) for school up-gradation in afternoon
shifts from primary to middle and middle to secondary and higher secondary
levels.
 Introduction of IT courses in schools / college through private sector under PPP
 Access to public funds – 25% utilization of funds at district level through CCBs
and PTAs

PPPs today in over 7000 + public sector schools. The number is

growing.
Government options for education provision through non-elite
CSOs is growing and needs to be tapped more efficiently with
higher returns to investment.

6
 Existing Educational Incentives for PPP and
Private Sector in Education
 Income Tax Exemption for teaching faculty and researchers]

 Income Tax incentives for Charitable Donations

 Exemption of custom duties and other taxes on import of education equipment

 Provision of land free or on concessional rates in rural areas. Zoning in urban

areas, zoning
 Electricity (an gas) shall be provided on lowest domestic tariffs;
 Provision of concessional financing for establishing rural schools through
respective Education Foundations and credit through DFIs for social safety nets
 Access to district development budgets through CCBs

(ESR : 2004)
Limited Knowledge& dissemination. District Governments not aware about them
and do not always facilitate implementation.

7
Defining PPP
 PPP is a collaboration of government, communities, NGOs,
individuals and private sector, in the funding, management
and operations to support education development in
Pakistan.
 A complementary role of all partners that enables them to
maintain their identities and to draw out their respective
comparative advantage.

 Collaboration may be at :
 a) government learning sites /institutions,
 b) community sites, and
 c) private sector sites

8
Section III : Instruments of PPP
 There are Legal Instruments – Formal MoUs of
many types :
 District Governments & their Education Departments
 Corporate Sector & Philanthropists
 NGOs- CSOs for intermediary support
 Adopted schools
 IT programmes
 CPP or upgradation in Afternoon Shifts
 Fellowship Schools
 Community Supported Schools

9
Types of PPPs in education in Pakistan
 Initiated by the Government … Fellowship Schools, Community Supported
Schools, CPP school upgradation in afternoon shifts
 Setting up of Education Foundations
 Initiated by autonomous bodies: Education Foundations; National
Commission for Human Development, Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy
(PCP)
 Adopt A School, Community Supported Schools, Feeder Schools, School Improvement
of Public and Private Schools
 Initiated by CSOs
(1) Home Schools
(2) Adopt A School
(2) Community Learning / Literacy Centers (using school premises / facilities)
(3) Education Extension and Enrichment Programs
(4) Creation of District Education Plans (DEPs)
(5) District Agreements between District Governments and NGOs. Agreements for
partnerships to cover capacity building, service delivery and planning/budgeting is a
post devolution phenomenon.
 Initiated by the Corporate Sector
 School Improvement Programs through NGOs, themselves (other social sectors too),
 Scholarship merit programs for girls/women/disadvantaged (schools/colleges/universities),
 Art competitions and support
 Public service messages, special programs ..etc
10
 Emerging corporate social responsibility, vision, focussed giving,
performance and accountability driven
 Types of PPPs elsewhere
 Charter Schools: Leasing out govt. schools to nonprofit organizations
ation/groups or as a cooperative. .core support contd. by public sector

 Magnet Schools – Excellence in Public Sector schools through PPPs ..

Mobilizing funds from private sector
 Vouchers for education.. Business, govt. and Development Partners funded
to promote choice and quality
 Ombudsman Educational Services's Alternative Education Programs for
high school drop outs to prevent high social costs by disaffected youth
 Learning solutions for public sector/private sector through university,
experts, schools and corporate sector partnerships.
 Contracting services to private sector in construction, procurements, etc.

11
Section IV : Emerging Critiques
 Pseudo Legal Agreements: govt. and political leaders win, civil society and
private sector loose out in the event of violations..litigation is not feasible or
desirable

 Govt. becomes inertia ridden giving up on responsibility, seen as retreat of the

state

 Management is restricted under PPP for civil society partners

 Education a devolved subject and policy/ program implementation depends

upon the capacity and comprehension of the District Govts. On PPP Policy
and Departments of Education regarding PPPs.

 Low Institutional capacity for PPP and support for innovations by public sector

 PPP and devolution: Local politics & political-bureaucratic tensions – particularly

in City Districts and elsewhere makes PPP difficult

 PPP exacerbates inequities as it tends to be more focused in well-off districts ..

There are exceptions.. Thatta; Tharparkar (UNILEVER etc)

 Union pressures on PPPs as usurping rights of teachers

12
Critique Contd…
 PPPs are Inputs vs. outputs driven .. Adhoc and low Accountability
for performance

 PPPs are being over-interpreted and implemented in programs in the

absence of commensurate capacity and systems

 Corporate sector intentions and citizens interest: Why the

corporate sector wants to ‘invest’ in people and poverty reduction to
more serious levels in term of clash of interest. As is well known
sometimes PPP is a cover for corporate priorities which are anti-social
or anti –poor,

 Limited informed research to iteratively influence policies on PPP

for poverty reduction.

 PPP on government sites and with district governments is a tough

challenge in which three different cultures of government, CSOs
and private sector need to accommodate change

13
Section V :
‘Conclusions Options for the Future
 Public sector provision may continue to operate sub-optimally, drifting towards privatization
withdrawing from public responsibility of quality education to disadvantaged groups… however
examples of public sector effort such as PESRP in Punjab are emerging models of reversing
this trend where government seeks to improve public sector service delivery. This province wide
sector effort may be replicated
 Major push for Capacity Building is needed to manage Public Private Partnerships ;
Dissemination of policy, tools and specific skills in interpreting PPP policy, instruments, role of
partners, conflict resolution skills, etc.
 Single Point of Contact / Department in the Government to Implement PPP..
 Corporate Sector, CSOs and Philanthropy have to date provided win-win solutions barring a few
exceptions. All indicators on enrolment, teachers presence, achievements show improvements
as well as quality
 Exploring PPP school improvement programs more holistically and innovatively through area
based or UC based options for a larger impact regenerating schools regenerating communities
as learning communities

 Resumption of Grant-in-Aid (GIA) a necessity today targeted towards the poor and under-
provisioned areas

 Creation of an Oversight Committee to Supervise the Implementation of the ESR’s PPP Initiative
14
Contd…
 Contracting out selective services including capacity building and management
solutions to private sector/CSOs

 Exploring innovative partnerships between industry, education and universities

for improved learning solutions to both public and non-elite private sector.

 Linking PPPs especially in highly intensive special zones, industry and

agriculture with focus on partnerships for school improvement, provision,
technical training and placements of youth in local industry

 Better Cost-Sharing for CSOs who implement PPP supported more procatively
through access to mainstream budgets and CCB grants.

 Informed practice through systematic research and evaluation of impact of PPPs

in poverty reduction programs. Resources to be put aside for this area of work
under PRSP and also sector specific budgets at government level and also
private sector
 Role of Development Partners to be responsive, consistent, facilitating learning
across countries for best practices

15
PPP – From constraints to possibilities
 Transformation of the school system under decentralised conditions
(ALL FORMS INCLUDING PPP) may be an important way of improving
rather than abandoning the public education system and addressing the
rights of the poorest for quality education through innovative means.

 Re-concepualization of PPPs, as abdication of the state to buffers

for improved service delivery: The messy early phases of devolution
with loosely coupled systems in public, political, and private spheres
adjusting to new devolved realities, are neutralized by partnerships for
poverty reduction. Public sector options must be fixed simultaneously
for improving the quality of a public good.

 "There is no magic bullet to achieve this; there is no alternative to

relying on the time-consuming and trouble-torn democratic practices of
mobilisation, organisation, advocacy, debate, protest and demand - in
short, the assertion of citizenship rights."

Manabi Majumdar, 2004 Fellow, Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Kolkata.

16
Introduction to Baela R.Jamil
 Baela Raza Jamil educated in education with public policy, quality education management
specialisms and economic history at the Institute of Education, SOAS, University of
London, Georgia State University, and Harvard University (HIID) is based in Pakistan.

 She is currently working in multiple capacities as Chairperson of Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi

(ITA or Centre for Education and Consciousness), Coordinator Alliance for Education
Development and is adviser to several major district based education programs in
Pakistan. She is the facilitator and co-designer of Pakistan’s Education Sector Reforms
Action (ESR) Plan 2001-2005/6 and the EFA Plan, embedded in a sector wide approach,
multi-level financing strategies through enabling partnerships. ESR and EFA are firmly
integrated within the country’s PRSP.

 Baela served earlier as Technical Adviser to the Ministry of Education. She has
successfully advocated and facilitated policy shifts in public sector. These range from
District-based education planning, to whole school improvement programs in under-
performing government schools, extending their optimum use as ICT-based community
learning centres in the afternoon, mobilizing local communities for addressing rights based
education and lifelong learning needs. Altogether a thinker and practitioner, she is
actively contributing to education public policy and practice on multiple fronts.

17