Synergy in Development 2006
Transforming Lives and Institutions Through Partnership

Home

About HED

Partnerships

Publications

News

RFAs

Contact

Links

Conference Overview

Plenary Sessions

Roundtables, Workshops, and Regional Sessions

TIES Pre-conference Workshop

Photo Competition

Participant List

Photo Gallery

Click here to return to the main conference page.

Plenary Sessions

Below is a listing of plenary remarks given during Synergy in Development 2006. Please follow the link for transcripts and other information.

Welcome Remarks

Mark Silverman, Deputy Assistant Administrator
United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean

James T. Smith, Deputy Assistant Administrator
United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade

Peter McPherson
President, National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges (NASULGC) and
Chair, Governing Board for Higher Education for Development

Opening Plenary

“Education and Global Citizenship: Opportunities for University Partnerships”

Fernando Reimers
Ford Foundation Professor of International Education
Director International Education Policy Program
Harvard University

Click here to view the powerpoint
Click here to view the article

Plenary Session

The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Higher Education
Moderator: Joseph Carney, USAID

Speakers:
Malcolm McPherson, Senior Fellow in Development
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University

Ken Lee, Senior Advisor
United States Agency for International Development

Mei Mei Peng, Education Program Specialist
United States Agency for International Development, Office of Education



Remarks

James T. Smith, Deputy Assistant Administrator
United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade


Distinguished guests, ladies and gentleman, good morning. I would like to welcome you to this conference on behalf of the United States Agency for International Development’s Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade. As the Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Bureau, I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak to all of you. I understand that there are more than 250 representatives in the audience from universities and colleges in 39 different countries, where we are working together to build the human and institutional capacity that is critical for healthy societies, sustainable economic growth, and vibrant democracies. Each of you gathered here today is to be applauded for your contribution to this incredibly important endeavor.

The institutional partnerships program with Higher Education for Development (HED) is a vital component of USAID’s broader collaboration with the higher education community. We value the HED program for the competitive, invitational process it uses to identify the most promising projects for creating capacity and contributing to the achievement of USAID’s development objectives.

As all of you know far better than I do, building institutional capacity in higher education is a complex task. It involves academic program development, faculty development, technology acquisition, improved financial management, and infrastructure development. HED partnerships provide an important way of accomplishing this complex task. They develop curricula, create new departments, train faculty, adapt technologies and, in some cases, build new institutions.

Over the past seven years, through HED and its predecessor ALO, USAID has invested (1998-2006) $50.0 million in 278 institutional partnerships between U.S. universities, colleges, and community colleges and counterpart institutions in 61 countries. The higher education community has matched USAID’s investment at a nearly 1:1 ratio.

Allow me to highlight a few examples of the contributions these partnerships are making:

  • Mexico. Nearly 50 partnerships have been implemented in support of NAFTA and shared development objectives between the United States and Mexico. As a result, the higher education sector throughout Mexico has developed or improved its training, education and applied research capacity in such areas as microfinance, natural resource management, business development, agricultural production, and health.

  • Rwanda. The PEARL program between Michigan State University, Texas A&M, and the National University of Rwanda has fundamentally improved coffee production in Rwanda and trained more than 2,500 Rwandan women and 3,800 Rwandan men in areas including coffee, cassava flour, and chili pepper production and marketing, financial management, business management, business plan writing, and information technology.

  • Indonesia. Ohio University and the State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah are working to build teaching and research capacity in civic education, through curriculum development. Partners are developing models of active teaching and problem-based learning for civic education for the K-12 madrasah network of Islamic schools in Indonesia.

  • Angola. The Mississippi Consortium for International Development and Agostinho Neto University established two new departments, political science and public administration as well as the only Faculty of Letters and Social Science of any higher education institution in Angola. After two decades of civil war these departments provided training for local government officials to address the shortage of skilled public administrators.

  • Macedonia. Indiana University and the South East European University are establishing a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual international university that offers a modern curriculum, high-quality teaching, action-oriented research, and community outreach. This effort was also critical to reducing civil conflict and strengthening democracy in Macedonia.

  • India. Eastern Iowa Community College District and Vasavi College of Engineering developed a model infrastructure for establishing a pilot community college system throughout southern India.

As these examples illustrate, the USAID/HED institutional partnership program is making a difference in people’s livelihoods through the use of multi-faceted partnerships involving training, education, applied research, technical assistance and community service, and contributing to USAID Mission objectives in a wide range of specific development areas.

This capacity to work with USAID Missions in a manner that helps them achieve their core priorities and programming objectives – along short and long term time horizons - is very important. As you know, USAID Missions have been and will remain the core channel through which the Agency implements its development assistance.

The successful implementation of higher education partnerships in various technical sectors and issue areas around the world demonstrate why the higher education community continues to be a vital partner for USAID. Whether the field is democracy, education, agriculture, health or economic growth, HED institutional partnerships have made significant contributions, drawing on all parts of the U.S. spectrum of higher education, from large research institutions, traditional land grant universities and minority serving institutions, to smaller state and private universities and community colleges.

USAID is proud to support these institutional partnerships – YOUR INSTITUTIONAL PARTNERSHIPS – to continue fostering the sharing of knowledge, the development and application of new knowledge, and the preparation of future educators and scholars, that changes communities for the better. Thank you for your efforts and your commitment to making that happen.

I wish you every success with this conference, and look forward to hearing of the results.

Thank you.

Plenary Session

The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Higher Education Ballroom

The closing plenary session brought experts from USAID to explore the relationship between economic growth and higher education. Higher education was defined as the generation of both formal and non-formal knowledge, and economic growth was defined as the sustained increase in real per capita income.

Panelists looked at how the two are inter-dependent, in that high quality higher education requires sustained economic growth and vice versa. Further, higher education generates knowledge and skills and fosters the attitudes and behaviors that stimulate and sustain the growth of income. Economic growth creates the incentives to use exciting knowledge to seek out the new knowledge and skills to raise future income.

HED partnerships have a direct, day-to-day, and immediate impacts on people in developing nations while also building a framework for long-term economic growth. The importance of U.S. students getting a global education is the long-term impact on the student who participates in a program focused on the world beyond their own borders and as a result becomes an engaged, global citizen.

Remarks

Malcolm McPherson, Senior Fellow in Development, Harvard University

Click here for the powerpoint that accompanied this presentation.
Click here for an annotated bibliography provided by the presenter.

Defining HE and EG:

Context: These definitions and, in my view, all discussions of HE and EG need to reflect notions of life-long learning and sustainability. The time-scale of effective learning – i.e., the acquisition and application of knowledge in ways that achieves some results and allows feed-back – is long term. None of us was, or has been, effective or productive until we have had (often extensive) job experience. For individuals, it is often two decades before they are through formal HE and usefully occupied. Similarly, HE organizations take several decades to have an impact. It took Harvard almost two centuries to emerge as a major institution of higher learning. MIT was “Boston Tech” for almost fifty years. Universities in Africa have undergone rapid expansion (in the immediate post-independence period) followed by general decline. Many of them are in the process of being revitalized (a topic addressed by an African Union sponsored workshop in Ghana in early 2006).

Higher Education is post-secondary formal and non-formal learning and knowledge transfer. The key point in emphasizing non-formal as well as formal is that most of knowledge, skills, attitudes, & aptitudes that individuals acquire are developed non-formally or, at least, con-jointly with formal learning. Knowledge goes well beyond the academic notion of structured study and assimilation of information on specific topics. It is know-how, knowing-what, knowing-when, knowing-where, knowing-why, knowing-why-not, and knowing-with-whom. In addition to formal instruction and learning there is (among others) learning-by-doing, learning-by-trading, learning-by-sharing, learning-by-participating, learning-by-adapting, learning-by-trial-and-error, learning-by-failing, learning-by-engaging, learning-by-working [Mali], and learning how to learn.

Economic growth is normally defined as the sustained increase in real (inflation-adjusted) per capita income (or output). The conventional definition of economic development is economic growth plus structural transformation. In fact, sustained economic growth does not occur (and cannot occur) without structural transformation reflected through reorganization, restructuring, and finding new ways of doing existing things or new things to do.

Fundamental to both HE and EG is their dependence on the ability and willingness to change of individuals and the organizations to which they contribute. Without change, there can be little learning; and, without learning, economic growth stagnates. [The Hawthorn experiments demonstrated this.] Indeed, economic growth itself is a learning experience. Growth is never steady or linear. It is fundamentally disruptive with the new or different regularly displacing (or modifying) the old and commonplace.

Inter-Dependence Between HE and EG:

HE generates the skills and knowledge and fosters the attitudes and behavior that stimulate and sustain the growth of income (or output). HE provides the administrative and managerial capacities and skills needed for output to expand. Much of that expansion depends on the willingness to adjust. Higher skilled workers [as shown by the ILO Employment Report 1999] will adjust more effectively and more rapidly than workers with fewer skills. That is, higher skilled workers have the capacity to reorganize and restructure. In fact, research has shown that reorganization has been a key source of economic growth in the United States for the last two centuries. [The evidence can be found in the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas study of 2004.]

EG creates the incentives to use existing knowledge productively and to seek new knowledge and skills that raise future income (or output). EG also generates the resources that allow HE to expand. Education creates human capital with adds to wealth [see Annex slide]. EG is the return on national wealth, of which human capital is a significant part.

The systemic effects work in reverse as well. With limited HE, the capacity to generate the skills and knowledge needed to grow on a sustained basis is constrained. With low rates of EG, the incentives and capacities (resources, organization) to expand HE (or learning in general) are weak. With low EG, poverty remains high. As a consequence, many families require their children to work. (In Mali, for example, half the children aged 10 to 14 are in the labor force.) This undercuts the expansion of education.

A point worth grasping is that both growth and non-growth are educational. Growth provides many constructive lessons about what is needed to continue growing. For example, EG demonstrates the value of discipline, organization, initiative, the importance of evidence-based activities, the rewards of risk-taking, and the benefits of cooperation and coordination. Non-growth provides many counter-productive lessons about the risks to be avoided to prevent further collapse in income. [Non-growth and poverty generate extremely conservative behavior.]

Evidence of the Linkages?

History: Historical evidence of countries; United States; Japan; and current day China, among others. It is simply not a coincidence that the rich countries have well developed systems of formal and non-formal HE. Both have been jointly determined and mutually reinforcing over time. Negative examples of the inter-dependence between EG and HE are evident in the poorest countries where low rates of economic growth (persisting over extended periods) have been accompanied by low formal HE participation rates (on the order of 2-3 percent of the relevant population cohort).

Wealth Studies: A 1994 World Bank study of the key components of wealth across different regions of the world highlighted the small share of human wealth in less developed countries. LDCs had low ratios of human capital to other productive inputs such as physical capital and natural resources. There economies generally lacked dynamism. Consequently, their national incomes were significantly lower than rich countries whose expansion has depended upon the growth of human capital.

Regional studies: MIT and the University of Cambridge undertake joint studies of the impact of HE on local economies. Many high concentrations of universities have spun off activities that form clusters – Route 128, Silicon Valley, the Research Triangle, and Bangalore (India). These knowledge-intensive agglomerations generate technologies that are then used to increase the productivity, most often, of other industries or sectors. For example, the greatest impact of new technology adoption in the United States over the last decade has been in retailing (product control, inventory management and so on) and financial services.

Professional Opinion: There are many examples of views regarding the links from HE to EG. (It is interesting to note that there are far fewer comments about the relationship running in the opposite direction.) The premise of HED is HE for development (of which EG is a sub-component). The president of UC/Berkeley in 1996 eloquently defended his organization in front of the California Senate arguing that it was making a major contribution to State development through research, teaching, and knowledge accumulation. The G8 statement on education from the St. Petersburg summit (July, 2006), the meeting of Heads of Commonwealth Universities (April 2006) and the OECD Meeting of Ministers of Education in Athens (June 2006) have strong statements about the role of HE in promoting EG. There are numerous UNESCO reports noting that the lack of education. In the current era when knowledge is so critical for international competitiveness, the lack of formal HE is particularly critical.

Experience of Corporations: Many of the large corporations IBM, the Bell System, Intel, 3M, Xerox, and Apple are examples of how the commitment to non-formal HE (embodied in R&D activities) can foster and sustain high rates of income growth. Rapidly expanding knowledge bases, driven by learning, experimentation, reorganization, and innovation have driven these firms’ growth and wealth creation. As Robert Owen, Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, Thomas Watson, and Bill Gates among many more have shown, finding new ways of doing existing things better and doing new things has always been a source of industrial and economic expansion.

Contemporary Comparisons: Current comparisons provide examples of countries that have rapid economic expansion together with rapid increases in learning and knowledge generation and others that have neither: China/Ethiopia; Indonesia/Nigeria; Vietnam/Myanmar; ….

Importance of Recognizing Inter-Dependence?

EG, as well as higher education, creates public goods: By expanding output and opportunities, economic growth creates spillovers of income and wealth. It also reduces the consequences of failure, since expanding economic opportunities cushion the consequences of risk-taking and losing. This encourages risk taking which is essential to innovation and change.

Skill-mix drives economic growth: It is not the average level of skills that drives economic growth, but the mix of skills. This result is now being confirmed empirically by studies that have been undertaken as a reaction to the many studies that showed weak (and sometimes negative) statistical associations between economic growth and years of schooling or average education attainment. It is the mix of skill, crudely measured as P/S/T or unskilled, semi-skilled, skilled, that matters for growth. Higher levels of skills provide flexibility and an ability to manage and adapt to new activities. The many thousands of engineers let go by NASA after the moon program was phased out quickly adapted to new circumstances with many of them driving the ICT revolution the effects of which emerged in the 1990s. Another example is Japan in the post-WWII period following the restructuring of its education system by the US Occupation administration. China’s rapid expansion of HE is shifting the balance between primary, secondary and tertiary level workers and providing the managerial capacities and professional skills needed to continue the high rates of economic growth.

Relevance: Does formal HE complement non-formal HE?: This issue was raised by Fernando Reimers and emerged in the discussion of PPPs and University-Business linkages. The basic point is that with so much non-formal learning occurring outside the formal education system, there has to be some concern (if only to ensure that growth can be sustained) about the degree to which the formal HE curriculum complements non-formal HE. This matter is vital in developing countries that are trying to lay a foundation for the knowledge-based economy and innovation of the 21st Century, a point made clear in the G8/Russia statement on education (July 2006).

Clustering and agglomeration effects in knowledge generation: Knowledge and information have important spillover effects. Once generated and disseminated, knowledge can be reused or recombined. Clustering – Route 128; Bangalore; Silicon Valley – drive knowledge creation. Michael Kremer (1993) makes the point more generally. He argued that humans have not become inherently smarter over time. (For example, Mozart would still be a genius in contemporary times.) Humans make progress by having more people focus on more problems in a structured way.

Matching development agenda to capacities: All of us at the conference are engaged in capacity building of some form or other. Moreover, this is fundamental to the HED mission. But, systemic effects need to be taken into account in what we do. We cannot all build capacity at the same time. When we do, the system (as reflected in the supply and demand for skills and the matching of skills to activities being undertaken) becomes overloaded. Many projects highlight the shortage of adequately skilled people with whom they work or who are available for training. Matching the agenda (what is being attempted) to existing capacities is a critical function of management. Most formal HE organizations perform this function exceedingly poorly. Understanding the HE/EG links leads to some sensitivity about the potential negative effects of overloading the system on EG and then on HE. {In his address, Peter McPherson mentioned the need for “balance”. Balancing capacities with what is being attempted is crucial in promoting development.) This is clearly an area that needs urgent attention. Most development agendas in poor countries are grossly over-extended. This compromised the quality of HE activities and the rate of EG.

Quality of HE, especially in relation to primary and secondary education: Fernando Reimers mentioned the term “disconnect” numerous times. An important question that needs to be asked and re-asked in developing countries is what is HE doing to raise the quality of primary and secondary education? Raising the quality of PE and SE is an investment in the quality of HE. Better graduates from primary and secondary levels raise the standards in HE. [In South Africa, the poor quality secondary graduates absorbs a major share of HE resources through the need for remedial programs. This undercuts the quality of HE graduates perpetuating the poor SE graduates/weak HE graduates.]

Contribution of the Conference:

Where are the synergies?
How are lives and institutions being transformed through partnership?

Looking Ahead

More (explicit) attention is needed to the systemic links between (formal) HE, non-formal HE and EG: A key feature of globalization, represented by the internet and spread of information and knowledge, is inter-dependence. Systemic effects, especially in efforts related to education, cannot and should not be ignored.

Recognize the consequences of EG and lack of EG for formal HE: The most recent data show that only 3700 of 150,000 patents issued in the United States were granted to universities and colleges. Most of the cutting edge applications of S&T and other research occur outside formal HE organizations. Thus, it is not a matter of formal HE generating information which the rest of the world uses; it is largely a matter of the rest of the world moving ahead with research with which the formal HEs need to keep abreast.

Relevance (with a twist) -- How does education generated by EG relate to formal HE activities?: Typical view of relevance is whether the activities of formal HE are related to what the rest of the economy and society can use. What can formal HE learn from the developments outside their sector that will improve (i.e., make more relevant) how formal HE relates to non-formal HE? This is especially important in poor countries where formal HE is struggling to catch up or is being revitalized.

How can formal HE enhance the quality of all learning (primary/secondary/non-formal)?: Poor quality formal HE undercuts primary and secondary education and vice-versa. There is a need to ensure that what occurs in HE builds upon and feeds back to raise the quality of PE and SE. This is especially important given the push for the MDG for universal primary completion. By 2015, under current programs, many children will complete primary education at a very low levels of quality. There will be a major need for rehabilitation (already evident in Uganda, Kenya and Malawi which pushed for mandatory primary attendance). [There is also the issue of how the economy can be boosted through the addition of skills. Educating children to the end of the primary cycle does nothing substantive for the mix of skills needed to support rapid economic growth.]

How can formal HE help engage the private business community to support capacity building to boost EG? Private businesses have many capacities (such as management which they use to cut their agenda to their capacities) that can be useful in supporting the public sector take the necessary actions to boost EG. How can the formal HE sector catalyze private-public activities that will achieve this goal?

Annex: HE & BE, A Framework

Education (at all levels) creates human capital, defined as the “…productive capacities of human beings as income producing agents in the economy.” Human capital is a fundamental source of economic growth. [Johnson argued that when one takes a long term view, this is all there has been. Humans have, through organization and initiative and the accumulation of knowledge and experience, raised their productivity using the existing fixed stocks and flows of natural resources.] But, EG generates the incentives to expand human capital further. [In this case, the demand for an expansion of HC is derived from the expansion of income.] EG also provides the resources that support that expansion. Some of these resources are used to expand higher education.

Ken Lee, Sr. Advisor, USAID

It is important to consider how sources of sustainability are both recipients and stimulators of EG. HED’s partnerships are having direct, day-to-day, and immediate impacts on people in developing nations while also building a framework for long-term EG. The TIES initiative in particular is a good example of this because each community that is involved in a TIES project becomes its own economy.

The HE community is underselling its value as a provider of short-term results by focusing exclusively on the long-term sustainability of its programs. Their programs have a significant immediate impact as well.

The problem is that we can’t all build capacity at the same time so partnerships need to focus (with HED’s help) on coordinating their calendars and efforts to free resources to work on other projects.


Mei Mei Peng, Education Program Specialist, USAID

What is the role of students in the sustainability and the coordination of HED’s programs? There is a broad range of involvement from those who benefit from a degree program, those who are part of an internship, or those who are part of a project’s design team.

What can be done to make better use of the students who are already involved in one of HED’s programs? Perhaps there could be a special session at the annual Synergy conference for them, or the creation of a virtual network to link these students though an online community.

Other questions: Should more HED proposals include a student as part of the team? Should there be more service-learning projects in HED proposals? What is the best way to strategically harness the energy, curiosity, intelligence, and passion of students?

USAID Cooperative Agreement AEG-A-00-05-00007-00

This publication was made possible through support provided by USAID/EGAT/ED. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.

Photo credits: The photos that accompany this report are courtesy of Jessica Weber and Charlie Koo.

© 2006-2010
Higher Education for Development (HED)

Send questions to HED.

Privacy Statement