Middle-tier governance and support for education: Examining actorscapes and the role of midlevel for scaling innovations in low- and middle-income countries

• In Event: Education Governance Future(s) in a Permacrisis World – Policyscapes, Timescapes, and Actorscapes (Part 3): Local Dynamics and the Critical Politics of Crisis

Proposal

Attention to the middle tier of governance of education systems—situated between the central government and schools and including both government agencies and civil society organizations— has lately increased. This is for several reasons but one is that many have realized that the middle tier represents a critical but underutilized lever for improving education outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Asim et al. 2023; Chimier et al. 2023; Hargreaves 2023). Despite the increased attention, however, the middle level remains understudied and underleveraged.

The qualitative study from which this proposed paper comes conducted 90 interviews in four LMICs (El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, Malawi, and Nepal) to pursue the questions (1) What specific roles do mid-level actors and actorscapes play in decision-making for scaling education innovations? (2) What are the contours of their work related to scaling impact and education improvement? To ensure diversity and data representativeness, in-country consultants in each country joined the project as authentic research partners, not simply data collectors. This collaborative effort integrated global perspectives with local knowledge, which was essential for developing a nuanced analysis and for bridging the global-local divide currently lamented in the comparative international research community (Cameron et al. 2025).

The paper and presentation will introduce the just-completed study and share resulting findings, analysis, and implications organized around four broad categories of influence on the middle tier: (a) the political context; (b) structures, roles, and resources of the middle tier; (c) mid-level actors and their actorscapes; and (d) influences external to the country. Some findings to be discussed include the following:
• Decentralization was narrower in practice than on paper, which constrains the middle level’s ability to contribute.
• Process issues and administrative tasks dominated mid-level work—leaving little time, capacity, or scope to focus on innovation or education reform
• Resource scarcity constrained experimentation, and there exists a link between an “appetite for risk in innovation” and available funds. Despite this, proactive education leaders did find ways to create opportunities for innovation even amidst scarce resources.
• Data and education management information systems at the mid-level were not used for decision-making or education innovation but rather for record-keeping, demonstrating compliance, and coordinating implementation of externally initiated programs.
• Instructional support as a mid-level responsibility is popular in global discourse but was non-existent in practice.
• In-country and cross-country learning opportunities were underutilized and therefore represent missed opportunities for knowledge-sharing and peer-exchange between mid-level actors.

As a whole, this paper will illuminate how governments, midlevel actors themselves, non-state actors, researchers, and funders can unlock the potential for middle tiers to better support education. Without a robust middle-level education governance and support, education cannot improve. And without improved education, countries cannot increase the learning and life outcomes—including peace, climate responsibility, and strengthened 21st century skills—necessary for the current era.

Authors

• Molly Curtiss Wyss, Brookings Institution

• Brad Olsen, The Brookings Institution