Early childhood public policy: towards a global common good

• In Event: Foregrounding the Local in Comparative Early Childhood public policy research

Proposal

Universal, rights-based, and integrated approaches to ECEC are essential but require a re-framing of priorities by international actors–i.e., NGOs, donors, and transnational bodies. To support countries in developing, implementing, and evaluating public policy, a shift of focus at the local level must consider effective international measures. These measures can aid in creating ethical, culturally appropriate, and democratically accountable public policies. My arguments are underpinned by my research and global policy developments (e.g., T20, 2022; Tashkent Declaration, 2022; Abidjan Principles, 2021; SEAMEO-CECCEP, 2023).
The covid19 pandemic—which is far from over for most of the world’s population—has been exacerbated by millions of refugees across the globe and a lack of basic health care and food, children’s services, international solidarity (vaccine nationalism) as well as inadequate global coordination, and inequality between and within countries in both the global south and global north. Existential, self-inflicted, and mutually reinforcing crises include the current pandemic, climate change impacts, threats to biodiversity, inequity, hunger and malnutrition, forced migration, economic risks, poverty, the growing reality of larger-scale armed conflict, and threats to democracy.
Analyses show young children are the worst affected group due to the widespread disruption of systems, programs, and services ECEC (UNESCO, 2021; UNICEF, 2020, 2021). Inequalities affecting infants, young children, and their families predate the COVID-19 pandemic, and they have been compounded by it. Consequently, young children from marginalized groups in all countries, including the most affluent ones, fare increasingly worse on a whole range of indicators, including stunting, healthy development, learning, protection, and the attainment of their full potential (Black et al., 2017, Danaei et al., 2016; Marmot, Allen, Boyce, Goldblatt, & Morrison, 2020). The global crisis of ECD/ECEC systems has had wide-reaching consequences through impacts on gender equality, parent, and especially women’s abilities to work, access education, and secure essential support services. This, in turn, has had both immediate and long-term implications for countries’ economic productivity, governance, social welfare systems, social cohesion, and intergenerational solidarity (e.g., pension systems) (Blofield, Braunstein, Filguiera, Grimalda, & Urban, 2020; Devercelli & Beaton-Day, 2020; Gromada, Richardson, & Rees, 2020).
The disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the general lack of action and commitment to complying with Target 4.2 of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Framework. Despite some welcome progress, access to the ECD/ECEC is far from universal and highly unequal between and within countries and regions. In contradiction to Abidjan Principles, governments rely on privatized services, perpetuating unequal access (UNICEF, 2019; UNESCO, 2021).
Multisectoral ECD policies are essential for enabling environments to implement well-planned, equitable, transparent, accountable, and effective ECD programs at sub-national and community levels. However, as of December 2019, only 76 countries and one territory had adopted 125 multisectoral ECD policy instruments. Regions leading in ECD policy development were South Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan Africa, and greater attention is needed in other world regions, especially lower-income and lower-middle-income countries.

Author

• Mathias Urban, Dublin City University