Localising SDG4: Context-sensitivity and political influence in the selection of targets and indicators on a national level

• In Event: Investigating Local and National Learning Outcomes in Contexts of Inequality, Conflict, and Emergency

Proposal

This paper will examine whether and how the SDG 4 targets and indicators have been applied to a national level to reflect quality education in a context-sensitive manner without missing the essence of global setting. For this purpose, national versions (including implementation plans) of SDG4 of some countries targeted in this panel are selected and compared with the global version. This exercise will reveal potential advantages as well as possible disadvantages of localised versions. On the one hand, they could be more demanding in terms of data specificity and more reflective of national concerns and priorities. On the other hand, they would be subjective to political influence and the capacity to collect data in the selection of targets and indicators.

In the global context, Unterhalter (2019) points out that educational indicators miss many of the values of the targets. Facing the gap between targets and indicators on a global level, this paper will investigate whether it is also true of national versions or it has been improved with the benefit of local initiatives aiming for context sensitivity. Another issue to be addressed in this paper is how the selection of targets and indicators of SDG 4 has been subject to the existing political power in society. In this respect, Fukuda-Parr (2022) explores the degree of effectiveness between indicators due to political influence in the field of health on a global level. This means that some indicators may not be in use effectively, even if they exist on the list, as they are not favourable to protect vested interests of the privileged few. It would be worthwhile to check it in the field of education. On top of this problem, it would be also likely to exclude some targets and indicators on a national level for the very same reason. Given this, if global educational indicators are missing on a national level despite their significance, it would be reasonable to suspect a possible influence from the existing vested interests rather than simply attributing the exclusion to the lack of capacity for data collection.

By reviewing the SDG4 targets and indicators for the countries in West Africa, East Africa and South Asia that are discussed by other four papers in this panel, this paper will delve into (1) the selection of indicators to reflect targets in a context-sensitive manner and (2) the difference in effectiveness among existing indicators as well as missing targets and indicators in relation to political implication. The complementary nature of this paper will also be informed by examining how these indicators are closely intertwined with the challenges of inequality, conflict and emergency featured in this panel.

Author

• Tadashi Hirai, University of Cambridge