Unequal partners? Networks,centrality, and aid to international education

Following the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, international development policy discourses have focused on partnership as an overarching principle. With a focus on participation and non-hierarchical relationships, new partnerships aim to reconstitute the aid relationship in a way that obviates power inequality and hegemony. However, empirical studies of these partnerships are scarce. This paper uses social network analysis to analyse relationships between organisations involved in prominent partnerships for education in international development. Our analysis of an original dataset demonstrates that bilateral donors, civil society organisations, and international organisations are most likely to occupy central positions in this network, meaning that they enjoy high levels of connectivity to many organisations. Literature on international networks suggests that these organisations would therefore shape the flow of information and ideas between organisations, influence the distribution of resources among members, and determine normative preferences of the partnerships. In contrast, recipient governments, private businesses, and universities occupy peripheral positions. We contextualise these findings with respect to literature on aid in international education and privatisation in the political economy of educational development.     

‘Development in reverse’? A longitudinal analysis of armed conflict,fragility and school enrolment

This paper presents a longitudinal analysis of cross-national data on armed conflict, state fragility, and enrolment in primary and secondary schooling. The study is motivated by questions raised in the 2012 Human Security Report, which challenges the widely held assumption that conflict is necessarily detrimental to educational outcomes. We use multilevel modelling techniques to determine how conflict and fragility relate to changes in enrolment. Our findings suggest that growth in enrolment is significantly lower in conflict-affected countries but that the effect is dependent upon countries' overall enrolment level. However, when we control for fragility, the effect of conflict is not significant, which is consistent with the Human Security Report's suggestion that fragility is an underlying cause of both conflict and poor educational outcomes. We conclude by discussing the relevance of our findings and challenges for future research on fragility and education.