Special Subject Group on
Policy Framework for Private Investment in
Education, Health and Rural Development
Report on
A Policy Framework for Reforms in Education
7. PLANNING FOR
THE FUTURE
7.1 Assumptions
In planning for
the future, it is assumed, obviously, that the
goal of an education policy would be to
universalise primary education (age group 5-9)
and upper primary education (age group 10-14
years). Apart from this, that a 75 % enrolment
rate is to be achieved in higher secondary (age
group 1519) and 20 % enrolment in colleges
and professional education (age group 20-24).
The age-wise
population projections for 2015 of the US Census
Bureau (Table 7.1) have been utilised to
arrive at the school going population. In making
these projections, all prices and costs are based
on 1998-99 levels.
7.2 Enrolment of
Students in 2015
The estimated
enrolment of students by the year 2015 will be
1130 lakhs in primary school, 1130 lakhs in upper
primary, 1130 lakhs in secondary and 220 lakhs in
colleges/university. The number of students in
each age group in the respective level of
education is presented in Table 7.2.
7.3 Number of Education
Institutions
To achieve the
above enrolments, the number of schools and
institutions needs to be increased manifold from
the current levels. Based on 150 students in a
primary school, the additional number of primary
schools would be 7,32,000 schools, double the
number today. Assuming 675 students in each
secondary school, additional 23,600 schools would
be required. At the tertiary level, additional
27,000 institutions, almost three times the
existing number, would be required with 580
students in each institution. The details of the
total educational institutions required are
presented in Table 7.3.
7.4 Recurring
Expenditure
Recurring
expenditure is in the form of establishment
expenses, teacher salaries, textbooks and
training material. The annual recurring
expenditure that would be required to meet the
above objectives would be around 11% of the
current GNP and 3.15 % of the projected GNP. This
translates to Rs.1,80,000 crores each year. The
compulsory and free education level (age group
5-14) would account for about 37 % (Rs. 65,850
crores) of the total expenditure. The public
spending would be 1.98 % of the projected GNP.
The details of the recurring expenditure are
presented in Table 7.4.
7.5 Capital Expenditure
Capital
expenditure pertains to cost of buildings,
furniture and fixtures, toilets, communication
equipment, computers etc. Capital costs to fund
the incremental number of institutions required
have been assumed taking an average cost of Rs.
10 lakhs for a primary institution, Rs. 20 lakhs
for a secondary institution and Rs. 40 lakhs for
a tertiary institution. On this basis, the total
capital expenditure required will be Rs.88,900
crores.
It is reasonable
to assume that this required capital investment
would be met over the next 15 years. Thus the
annual capital expenditure will be Rs. 5,900
crores. The computation of capital costs is
presented in Table 7.5.
7.6 Public and Private
Spend on Education
The total
expenditure has been separated as those that
would be spent by the government and that would
be spent by the private sources. The percentages
of public spending would be 90 % in the primary
sector, 50 % in the secondary sector and 40 % in
the tertiary sector. This would translate to a
total public spending of Rs. 1,17,000 crores and
a private spending of Rs. 68,900 crores. In
effect this means that the government would spend
63 % of the total expenditure. The private sector
would spend the rest. The government spend would
be 1.98 % of the projected GNP. The details of
the public and private investments in education
are presented in Table 7.6.
7.7 Estimates of
Manpower Requirements for Tertiary Education Planning
Three scenarios
have been presented, one where India would
achieve a GNP growth of 6 percent (pessimistic),
8 percent (most likely) and 10 percent
(optimistic). The requirements of professionals
in various sectors are based on the growth in
GNP. In the case of engineers, the growth rate in
manufacturing sector and its contribution to the
economy is taken into consideration. The
assumptions are that agriculture will constitute
20 percent of GDP, manufacturing and services
will constitute 40 percent each. Estimates of GNP
growth under the three scenarios are given in Table
7.7.
In the case of
doctors, including dentists and veterinary
doctors and nurses, who are involved in providing
healthcare services, an idealistic target number
of doctors and nurses per 1000 population based
on international human development statistics
were relied upon.
The estimates
indicate that the total population that should
have achieved tertiary education will between 5.6
% and 9.8 %. The total number of teachers in all
the sectors would need to increase from the
existing 49.25 lakhs to a range of 93.47 lakhs to
119.15 lakhs. The details are presented in Table
7.8.
7.8 Options in
Financing and Management
Present systems
for financing and managing education are often
inappropriate for meeting the challenges of
ensuring equity in education amongst
disadvantaged groups, ensuring quality of
education and for speeding up reforms in the
education system. Public financing is growing
more difficult as enrolments expand. Public
intervention in education can be justified on
several counts: it can reduce inequality, open
opportunities for the poor and the disadvantaged,
compensate for market failures in lending for
education, and make information about the
benefits and availability of education generally
available. But public spending on education is
often inefficient and inequitable. It is
inefficient when it is misallocated among uses;
it is inequitable when qualified potential
students are unable to enrol in institutions
because educational opportunities are lacking or
because of the inability to pay.
The inefficiencies
and inequities, along with expanding enrolments
in public schools at all levels, have contributed
to increasing the share of GNP devoted to public
spending on education. The result is increasing
pressure on public funds.
To merely increase
efficiency in public spending on education may
not be enough. The government will necessarily
have to increase the quantum of public spending.
This can be done
in several ways. Government can reallocate public
spending to education from other publicly funded
activities such as defence and inefficient public
sector enterprises. Government can increase
revenues and spend more on education. Government
can also supplement public funds for education
with private funds.
Private financing
can be encouraged either to fund private
institutions or to supplement the income of
publicly funded institutions. Private schools and
universities tend to draw their students from
more advantaged socio-economic backgrounds, and
thereby promote diversity and provide useful
competition for public institutions, especially
at higher levels of education.
7.9 Policy Options in
Financing Education
Adverse
macroeconomic conditions and keen inter-sectoral
competition for public funds have reduced the
Indian government's ability to continue expanding
education. The lack of a credit market for
education makes this problem worse. There are
basically three policy options that could
overcome some of the problems in financing
education. These options are:
Recovering the
public cost of higher education and
reallocating government spending on education
towards the level with the highest social
returns
Developing a
credit market for education, together with
selective scholarships, especially in higher
education
Decentralising
the management of public education and
encouraging the expansion of private and
community-supported schools.
7.10 Public Investment
in Education
The high rates of
return estimated for basic education in most
developing countries strongly suggest that
investments to improve enrolments and retention
in basic education should generally have the
highest priority in India, which has not yet
achieved universal basic education. A policy
package in respect of the role of the public
sector in education would consist of:
Free basic
education, including cost-sharing with local
communities and targeted stipends for
children from poor households
Selective
charging of fees for upper-secondary
education, combined with targeted
scholarships.
Fees for all
public higher education, combined with loans,
taxes, and other schemes to allow needy
students to defer payment until they become
income-earners, and a targeted scholarship
scheme to overcome the reluctance of the poor
to accumulate debt against uncertain future
earnings.
Assurance of
quality primary education for all children by
making that level the top priority for public
spending on education.
Improved
access to quality general secondary education
as the second priority, once all children are
receiving good primary education.
7.11 Efficient Public
Spending at the School and Institution Level
Public finance is
the main instrument for implementing public
priorities, and there is a strong rationale for
public intervention in the financing of
education. The high private rates of return to
investments at all levels of education justify
large investments by individuals. They also
justify self-financing by families or students,
through immediate or deferred cost sharing.
Despite these high private returns and the
justification for private finance, there is also
a strong case for public intervention, especially
for basic education, for reasons of income
distribution, capital market imperfections,
information asymmetries, and externalities. In
fact most governments are heavily involved in all
levels of education - an activity that takes up a
significant portion of public expenditure.
Education expenditure by source of funds in some
important countries is given in Table 7.9.
7.12 Private Financing
as an Incentive Mechanism
The general
expectation is that the more a school depends on
private financing, through fees collected from
students or contributions from the local
community, or both, the more the school is likely
to use resources efficiently. When people share
directly in the cost of a service, they are
likely to monitor costs more closely and guard
against waste. Even when public institutions
charge no fees, allowing fee-charging private
institutions to emerge and survive can generate
the incentive for greater efficiency. Such
institutions promote competition in the system
and generate information for judging the
performance of public institutions.
7.13 Financing
Upper-Secondary Education and Higher Education
Since secondary
school graduates will have higher earnings than
those who leave school earlier, selectively
charging fees for public secondary school can
help to increase enrolments. Cost sharing with
communities can be encouraged at the secondary
level. There is considerable evidence that
household demand for education is relatively
price-inelastic, that is, unresponsive to
increases in private costs, except among the
poor. The relative inelasticity of demand could
be a useful criterion for making decisions about
charging fees. However, poorer families have
difficulty in meeting the direct and indirect
costs of children's school attendance. To offset
this hardship, secondary school fees can be
combined with scholarships and stipends to ensure
equity in enrolment.
In general, fees
are justified at public institutions for higher
education. An optimal policy would be full cost
recovery by public higher education institutions,
with students paying fees out of parental income
and out of their own future incomes, through a
loan scheme or a graduate tax. Such a policy is
very distant in India since existing fee levels
are so low and experience with loan schemes has
been relatively disappointing.
7.14 The Efficiency of
Alternative Types of Higher Education
An extremely
radical cost-saving intervention is distance
education. Distance education is dramatically
cheaper than conventional higher education. But
lower unit costs do not necessarily imply greater
efficiency in open universities, because
completion rates often are also lower. One reason
is that open universities tend to attract weaker
students because entry is usually
non-competitive. Another reason is that, with
only a tenuous link to an institution, teachers
and fellow students, a student's motivation and
discipline to complete a course is poorly
reinforced. Even though open universities produce
graduates efficiently, the output is wasted
unless graduates are productive in the labour
market.
7.15 Creating a Credit
Market for Education
Without
well-functioning commercial credit markets,
people must often borrow funds from relatives,
friends and moneylenders. These sources of credit
are inefficient since the ability to borrow
depends on whom the borrower knows and whether
willing lenders can be found.
Extensive
financial regulation generally limits total
supply of loans in the economy, and private banks
may be unwilling to lend to students. Education
is a particularly long-term investment, and risks
are high because few students have acceptable
collateral. Graduates may be unable to repay
loans if they are ill or unemployed. India also
lacks the legal and administrative framework to
enforce financial contracts effectively.
The government can
play an important role in alleviating students'
difficulties in obtaining educational credit. The
government is big enough to absorb risks that
private lenders cannot or will not bear, by
insuring commercially loaned funds from banks. If
loans are under government authority, employers
may also be willing to make deduction from former
students' salaries for loan repayment. Some types
of loans, especially for medical studies, could
be repaid through national service in deprived
areas of the country. The extensive network of
more than 66,000 branches of commercial banks
could be used effectively for
government-guaranteed student loan
administration.
7.16 Student Loan
Schemes
Introducing loans
for higher education adds benefits on almost all
counts. Loans mobilise more resources for higher
education by tapping graduates' future earnings,
even when default rates and administrative costs
of loan schemes are high. They improve resource
allocation because students will tend to enrol in
the courses with the highest returns. When
augmented by selective scholarships, loans
improve student selection and equity by allowing
talented students from poor families to compete
for places in higher education.
Student loan
schemes are an essential complement to cost
recovery and the charging of fees. Many students
are unable to afford the cost of higher education
out of their families' current income, and loan
schemes permit them to pay out of their future
earnings. About fifty countries, industrial and
developing, have such schemes. In most countries,
loans are repaid according to a fixed schedule;
in a few, including Australia and Sweden, they
are repaid as a proportion of a graduate's income
each year. In the United States, student loan
programmes guaranteed by the government enable
borrowing from abroad also. Loan schemes can be
made financially sustainable, as the experiences
of Canada and Colombia demonstrate. They require
the public sector to bear some of the risk, since
banks and financial institutions are generally
unwilling to accept students' likely future
earnings as collateral. Sustainable loan schemes
require an effective collection agency with
incentives to minimise evasion and default.
Income-contingent and graduated annual payment
schemes are needed to encourage repayment
commensurate with the students' future earnings,
which will rise over time.
7.17 Involvement of
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Education
The contribution
that NGOs can make to efforts to expand access
and improve the quality of education is immense.
The Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC)
is a shining instance of an NGO playing a
national role in the country's health and
population programmes. In 1992, BRAC had more
than 8,000 schools operating, and plans are being
made to expand to 50,000 schools. The education
programme is free to students, except for
community contributions for school construction.
Internationally, BRAC is a model for the
potential of the NGO sector in education
expansion. It also illustrates how a combination
of targeting, school design, flexibility and
follow-through can dramatically increase girls'
primary school participation rates. NGOs have
greater flexibility than government bureaucracies
and may be able to reach target groups more
effectively. Furthermore, as BRAC's expansion
programme illustrates, NGOs need not necessarily
be limited to small pilot projects, but can also
carry out large-scale delivery programmes.
NGOs have long
been pioneers in the area of early child
development. Save the Children, for instance, is
an international NGO that has worked with at-risk
children and families since 1932 and is now
active in forty countries world-wide. The Aga
Khan Foundation is working in parts of Pakistan
and with Muslim communities on the coast of
Kenya. The Soros Foundation focuses a large share
of its resources on pre-school education in
Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
7.18 Revenue
Diversification
Encouraging public
educational institutions to diversify their
sources of revenue and allowing them to keep such
revenues can encourage autonomy. The scope for
this is greatest in higher education. The
practice of attracting resources from alumni and
private industry is standard among private
schools and universities, and is beginning to
spread to public ones. In Chile, Indonesia,
Thailand and Venezuela, private industry provides
scholarships or subsidised loans for talented
university students. Structured tax regimes can
encourage such donations.
Public schools and
universities can also use their facilities to
provide income. Universities in Uganda and
Senegal generate 4 to 5 percent of annual
expenditure by renting out facilities. China and
Vietnam encourage schools to run short-term
courses, and provide services to industry.
7.19 Quality of
Education and Education Expenditure
Schooling within
formal education systems plays an important role
in the expansion of human capital. However, there
is a big difference between children sitting in a
classroom and an increase in human capital. The
quality of education is a deep concern in India.
If the quality deficiencies were due merely to
the lack of inputs the policy prescription would
be obvious: increase resources. However,
empirical evidence shows that resources are only
tenuously related to measured achievement.
Budgets do not account for performance, how well
a budget is spent plays an important role. There
is clear evidence that the enormous
inefficiencies in education spending arise due to
relatively high spending on teacher inputs.
In a study made in
Northeast Brazil, it was found that cost
effectiveness of teacher salaries (normalised to
one) is by far the lowest. Material inputs that
provide amenities to the school and teachers,
such as teacher tables, toilets, bookcases, have
a cost effectiveness on average 7.7 times larger
than teacher salaries. Instructional materials
have cost effectiveness ratios between 17 and 34
times as large as the impact of additional
spending on teacher salary increases.
A World Bank study
in India covering eight states has come to
similar conclusions. The cost effectiveness of
spending on improving physical facilities is
higher than that of teacher salaries (1.2 times
higher), however that for increasing just
classroom size is between 1.7 and 4 times higher.
The cost effectiveness of spending on
instructional inputs is between 4 and 14 times
higher than that of increasing teacher salaries.
7.20 Universal Basic
Education is Possible
Every time the
country talks of improving the quality of
education or universalising elementary education,
it is suggested that a shortage of resources is a
strong obstacle to progress. The truth is
different. It is not a matter of resources but of
priorities.
Poorer countries
than India have achieved much more in education.
War-torn Vietnam with a per capita income of
under $300 has achieved a literacy rate of 94 per
cent. Kenya, with a per capita income of $340 has
achieved a literacy rate of 75 percent. India
with a per capita income of $390 has a literacy
rate of 62 per cent.
India also needs
to improve the efficiency of public spending on
education. It spends around 3.5 per cent of its
gross national product (GNP) on education - a
much higher share than China and Sri Lanka - but
its educational achievements are lower. Sri
Lanka, which spends only 3.1 percent of its GNP
on education, has ensured that 90 percent of
adults are literate and that 98 percent of
children complete primary school. China spends
only 2.3 percent of its GNP on education, and 82
per cent of its adults are literate, while 94
percent of those who enter school complete
primary schooling. Vietnam spends only 2.6
percent of its GNP on education, yet, as already
mentioned, the literacy level is 94 percent.
7.21 Industry -
University Partnership
The universities
must be strongly encouraged to form partnerships
with industry. Such a linkage would entail
several benefits for the university. It would
give the university opportunities to attract
additional funds for teaching and research
thereby facilitating financial autonomy, access
to latest technology, improved employment
prospects for students, continuous upgradation
and adaptation of curriculum and improved
motivation in students.
The industry would
also stand to benefit through reduction in
recruiting costs, access to pre-screened, high
achieving students, cost effective productivity,
better communications with the higher learning
centres and collaborative research opportunities.
Students stand to
gain in the form of real life practical
experience, contact with practising
professionals, and application of theoretical
knowledge and enhancement of oral and written
skills.
7.22 Network and
Infrastructure Planning
Planning networks
and establishing networks among neighbourhood
villages offer a potent possibility in this era
of modern communications facilities and the
Internet. It is physically and economically
viable to link villages using wide area networks
and provide community Internet centres. All
teaching can originate from the 'hub' villages
for dissemination simultaneously to a number of
villages. The advantages of such a network are
basically two. One, the pupil-teacher ratio can
be raised to a new high, without unduly affecting
the quality of education. Two, timing can be kept
flexible so as to involve the entire household in
the education process.
Table 7.
1
INDIAS
POPULATION PROFILE
(in
Million)
| Age
Group |
Year 2000
|
Year 2015
|
| 0-4 |
117
|
115
|
| 5-9 |
113
|
113
|
| 10-14 |
111
|
113
|
| 15-19 |
103
|
113
|
| 20-24 |
94
|
110
|
| 25-29 |
84
|
109
|
| 30-34 |
76
|
100
|
| 35-39 |
67
|
90
|
| 40-44 |
58
|
81
|
| 45-49 |
49
|
72
|
| 50-54 |
40
|
62
|
| 55-59 |
32
|
51
|
| 60-64 |
24
|
40
|
| 65-69 |
18
|
30
|
| 70-74 |
14
|
20
|
| 75-79 |
8
|
12
|
| 80+ |
6
|
10
|
| Total |
1014
|
1241
|
Source:
US Census Bureau
Table
7.2
ESTIMATED
DEMAND FOR EDUCATION BY YEAR 2015
(in Million)
| Particulars |
|
| School-going population (5-19 years) |
339
|
| Primary (5-9 years) |
113
|
| Upper Primary (10-14 years) |
113
|
| Potential Secondary (15-19 years) |
113
|
| Estimated Secondary (75% of
potential secondary) |
85
|
| Potential college-going population
(20-24 years) |
110
|
| Estimated college-going population (20% of potential
college-going)
|
22
|
Based on
Population Profile
Table
7.3
ESTIMATED
DEMAND FOR SCHOOLS/INSTITUTIONS
BY THE
YEAR 2015
(numbers)
| |
Total required
|
Existing (1996)
|
Additional required
|
| Primary |
1506,667
|
775,000
|
731,667
|
| Secondary |
125,556
|
102,000
|
23,556
|
| Tertiary |
37,931
|
10,460
|
27,471
|
Source:
Reliance Research
Table
7.4
ESTIMATED
RECURRING EXPENDITURE
IN 2015
AT 1998-99 PRICES
(Rs. crores)
A.
|
School-going
population (5-19)
|
|
i.
|
Primary (5-9)
|
65,850
|
ii.
|
Secondary
(15-19)
|
73,022
|
B.
|
College-going
population (20-24)
|
41207
|
| |
Total
Expenditure (A (i+ii) + B)
|
180,079
|
| |
GNP for
1998-99
|
16,12,383
|
| |
Recurring
expenditure as a % of GNP
|
11.16%
|
Source :
Reliance Research
Table
7.5
ESTIMATED
CAPITAL COSTS AT 1998-99 PRICES
| |
Additional required
(numbers)
|
Capital
Cost
(Rs.
per unit)
|
Total
(Rs.
crores)
|
Required capital
investment
(Rs.
crores)
|
| Primary |
7,31,667
|
10,00,000
|
73,167
|
4,878
|
| Secondary |
23,556
|
2,00,000
|
4,711
|
314
|
| Tertiary |
27,471
|
40,00,000
|
10,988
|
732
|
| Total |
|
|
88,866
|
5,924
|
Source: Reliance
Research
Table
7.6
ESTIMATED
BREAKUP OF PRIVATE AND PUBLIC
SECTORS
INVESTMENTS (2015)
| |
Share of public investment |
Share of private investment |
Public investment |
Private investment |
| |
Percent |
Percent |
Rs. crores |
Rs. crores |
| Recurring |
| Primary |
90
|
10
|
59,265
|
6,585
|
| Secondary |
50
|
50
|
36,511
|
36,511
|
| Tertiary |
40
|
60
|
16,483
|
24,724
|
| Non-recurring |
| Primary |
90
|
10
|
4,390
|
488
|
| Secondary |
50
|
50
|
157
|
157
|
| Tertiary |
40
|
60
|
293
|
439
|
| Total |
| Primary |
|
|
63,655
|
7,073
|
| Secondary |
|
|
36,668
|
36,668
|
| Tertiary |
|
|
16,776
|
25,163
|
| Grand total |
|
|
117,099
|
68,904
|
Source:
Reliance Research
Table
7.7
GNP
FORECAST OF INDIA
(REAL
TERMS AT 1998-99 PRICES)
(Rs.
billion)
| GNP growth |
6%
(Pessimistic)
|
8%
(Most
likely)
|
10%
(Optimistic)
|
| 1998-99 |
15974.16
|
15974.16
|
15974.16
|
| 1999-00 |
16932.61
|
17252.09
|
17571.58
|
| 2000-01 |
17948.57
|
18632.26
|
19328.73
|
| 2001-02 |
19025.48
|
20122.84
|
21261.61
|
| 2002-03 |
20167.01
|
21732.67
|
23387.77
|
| 2003-04 |
21377.03
|
23471.28
|
25726.54
|
| 2004-05 |
22659.65
|
25348.98
|
28299.20
|
| 2005-06 |
24019.23
|
27376.90
|
31129.12
|
| 2006-07 |
25460.38
|
29567.06
|
34242.03
|
| 2007-08 |
26988.01
|
31932.42
|
37666.23
|
| 2008-09 |
28607.29
|
34487.01
|
41432.86
|
| 2009-10 |
30323.72
|
37245.97
|
45576.14
|
| 2010-11 |
32143.15
|
40225.65
|
50133.76
|
| 2011-12 |
34071.74
|
43443.70
|
55147.13
|
| 2012-13 |
36116.04
|
46919.20
|
60661.85
|
| 2013-14 |
38283.00
|
50672.74
|
66728.03
|
| 2014-15 |
40579.98
|
54726.56
|
73400.83
|
| 2015-16 |
43014.78
|
59104.68
|
80740.92
|
Source:
Base figure: Economic Survey 2000;
Estimates:
BIU, Chennai
Table
7.8
PROJECTION
OF MANPOWER FOR TERTIARY EDUCATION
| |
|
Required
resource if GDP growth is
|
Required
rate of compounded annual growth to reach the
desired level
|
| |
Existing Resource
|
6%
|
8%
|
10%
|
6%
|
8%
|
10%
|
| |
1998
|
Pessimistic
|
Most Likely
|
Optimistic
|
Pessimistic
|
Most Likely
|
Optimistic
|
| |
Nos.
|
Percent
|
| |
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
(2)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
(3)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
(4)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
| Professionals |
2,854,545
|
15,270,074
|
20,981,922
|
28,662,698
|
11.05
|
13.28
|
15.51
|
| Engineers |
2,053,900
|
8,849,098
|
12,159,147
|
16,610,202
|
9.56
|
11.76
|
13.96
|
| Scientists |
126,945
|
2,756,701
|
3,787,859
|
5,174,467
|
21.21
|
23.64
|
26.08
|
| Doctors |
359,700
|
1,263,543
|
1,736,178
|
2,371,734
|
8.17
|
10.34
|
12.51
|
| Dentists |
20,700
|
63,177
|
86,809
|
118,587
|
7.22
|
9.37
|
11.53
|
| Veterinary doctors |
42,700
|
126,354
|
173,618
|
237,173
|
7.02
|
9.16
|
11.31
|
| Nurses |
250,600
|
2,211,200
|
3,038,311
|
4,150,534
|
14.58
|
16.88
|
19.18
|
| Graduates |
15,180,200
|
65,134,465
|
89,498,341
|
122,260,675
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Arts |
7,663,100
|
32,880,457
|
45,179,559
|
61,718,276
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Science |
3,479,300
|
14,928,812
|
20,513,009
|
28,022,132
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| |
|
|
Required
resource if GDP growth is
|
Required
rate of compounded annual growth to reach the
desired level
|
| |
Existing Resource
|
6%
|
8%
|
10%
|
6%
|
8%
|
10%
|
| |
1998
|
Pessimistic
|
Most Likely
|
Optimistic
|
Pessimistic
|
Most Likely
|
Optimistic
|
| |
Nos.
|
Percent
|
| |
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
(2)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
(3)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
(4)/(1)^(1/16)-1
|
| Commerce |
4,037,800
|
17,325,196
|
23,805,773
|
32,520,267
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Post-graduates |
4,765,300
|
20,446,718
|
28,094,916
|
38,379,520
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Arts |
3,341,300
|
14,336,688
|
19,699,398
|
26,910,686
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Science |
695,500
|
2,984,218
|
4,100,479
|
5,601,527
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Commerce |
728,500
|
3,125,812
|
4,295,038
|
5,867,308
|
9.53
|
11.73
|
13.93
|
| Total population in the tertiary
level |
22,800,045
|
100,851,257
|
138,575,179
|
189,302,894
|
9.74
|
11.94
|
14.14
|
| % of population required to achieve
tertiary education as % of total population |
2.38%
|
5.68%
|
7.80%
|
10.65%
|
5.59
|
7.71
|
9.83
|
| Teachers |
4,925,154
|
9,347,440
|
10,465,173
|
11,914,832
|
4.09
|
4.82
|
5.68
|
| Primary |
3,083,345
|
5,685,944
|
6,498,221
|
7,581,258
|
3.90
|
4.77
|
5.78
|
| Secondary |
1,521,186
|
2,457,986
|
2,621,852
|
2,809,127
|
3.04
|
3.46
|
3.91
|
| Tertiary |
320,623
|
1,203,511
|
1,345,100
|
1,524,447
|
8.62
|
9.38
|
10.24
|
Source:
Base figures: Institute of Applied Manpower Research;
estimates: BIU, Chennai
Table
7.9
EDUCATION
EXPENDITURE BY SOURCE OF FUNDS, ALL
LEVELS
OF EDUCATION COMBINED (1991)
Group and country
|
Public sources
|
Private sources
|
| OECD |
|
|
| Australia |
85.0
|
15.0
|
| Canada |
90.1
|
9.9
|
| Denmark |
99.4
|
0.6
|
| Finland |
92.3
|
7.7
|
| France |
89.7
|
10.3
|
| Germany |
72.9
|
27.1
|
| Ireland |
93.4
|
6.6
|
| Japan |
73.9
|
26.1
|
| Netherlands |
98.0
|
2.0
|
| Spain |
80.1
|
19.9
|
| United States |
78.6
|
21.4
|
| Low-and middle-income countries |
|
|
| Haiti |
20.0
|
80.0
|
| Hungary |
93.1
|
6.9
|
| India |
89.0
|
11.0
|
| Indonesia |
62.8
|
37.2
|
| Kenya |
62.2
|
37.8
|
| Uganda |
43.0
|
57.0
|
| Venezuela |
73.0
|
27.0
|
Source:
Priorities and strategies for education - A World Bank
review 1995


|