Options for Financing Lifelong Learning
How should lifelong learning be financed? The author attempts to answer the question by creating a framework for analyzing different education financing mechanisms in light of particular characteristics of lifelong learning. The framework compares...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2003/03/2176367/options-financing-lifelong-learning http://hdl.handle.net/10986/18324 |
| Summary: | How should lifelong learning be
financed? The author attempts to answer the question by
creating a framework for analyzing different education
financing mechanisms in light of particular characteristics
of lifelong learning. The framework compares the different
financing alternatives on four dimensions: (1) who
ultimately pays for the education, (2) who finances its
immediate costs, (3) how payments are made, and (4) who
collects the payments. The author uses specific
characteristics of lifelong learning to determine which
among the financing alternatives are most useful. The
characteristics are that the individual should decide what
and where to study, carry a significant part of the
financial burden, and be encouraged to continue learning
through all life stages. The author analyzes the financing
alternatives according to who ultimately pays for the
education. Hence, the alternatives are classified either as
cost-recovery or cost-subsidization alternatives.
Cost-recovery alternatives include traditional loans, a
graduate tax, human capital contracts, and income-contingent
loans. Subsidization alternatives are those in which the
state directly subsidizes institutions or in which the state
gives vouchers to students. The author concludes that
combining income-contingent loans and human capital
contracts with vouchers is the most efficient and equitable
method for financing lifelong learning. The author discusses
the role of governments and multilateral organizations in
improving the financing of lifelong learning. He assesses
shifting toward cost-recovery alternatives, focusing on
collection of payments, and aiming for the involvement of
private capital as key issues that should be addressed to
ensure that lifelong learning will be available for all
equitably and efficiently. |
|---|