A critical analysis of donor education strategies for international development International Development

• Main Author: Marks, Caroline
• Published: Ulster University 2014
• Subjects: 379.12
• Online Access: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.650305

The purpose of this study was to analyse donor education strategies for international development using critical discourse analysis. The analysis focused on the two multilateral agencies and ten bilateral donors that contributed the most Official Development Assistance to education over the period 2002-10. The objective was to investigate linkages between Education Strategy texts, global development discourses, donor government political ideologies and education funding priorities. The methodology involved Fairclough's (1992) three level approach to critical discourse analysis. At the micro level the content of the texts was analysed. At the mid-level, inte[textual influences were identified. At the macro level, donor government political ideology and education aid allocations were considered. Five main education and development discourses were identified : ' education as a human right' , 'education and economic growth', 'qualified development', 'knowledge economies', and ' fragility, conflict and global security ' . Bilateral donor discourses were more often influenced by the World Bank than UNICEF. This supports the assertion that neo-liberal discourses still dominate international aid policy, despite the semblance of an ideological convergence towards a poverty consensus since the 1990s. Conversely, UNICEF, which is dependent on voluntary contributions, is necessarily more responsive to the discourses of its main bilateral sponsors than the World Bank. Government political ideology may matter. However, structurally and culturally embedded values transcend short-term government changes in terms of influencing aid policy. Weak evidence suggests that donors who take a rights-based approach are likely to support basic education through multilateral agencies; donors concerned with promoting global or regional stability are inclined to support basic education through the public sector; and donors who are driven by commercial interests tend to support higher education. Within the ' qualified ' development discourse, donor orientations vary between human/social development, sustainable development or good governance. Despite this rhetorical divergence, practical implications of these 'qualified' discourses are not evident.