NN38, February 2007
Technical and Vocational Skills Development
WHAT HAS BEEN THE IMPACT OF THE WORLD BANK?S SKILLS DEVELOPMENT IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA REPORT?
By Simon McGrath, University of Nottingham
KeywordsWorld Bank, Skills Development in sub-Saharan Africa, Skills development policy
Summary
This article revisits the 2004 World Bank report on Skills development in sub-Saharan Africa. It argues that this report builds upon the earlier 1991 Bank policy paper in five main ways that complement and extend the earlier analysis rather than revise it. Some important limitations on the current, and likely future, impact of the 2004 report are also discussed.
****
In 2004, the World Bank published a report on Skills development in sub-Saharan Africa which primarily sought to review the way that the sector had developed within that region since the Bank?s policy paper of 1991. Significantly, one of the two authors of the 2004 report, Adams, had been one of the three authors of the 1991 paper and the subsequent 2003 book that provided a more academically-oriented reading of the policy document?s arguments.
It is difficult to fully isolate the impact of the 2004 report from its predecessor, as it builds on it in five important ways. First, it is important to remember that it is not a new policy paper and, thus, is not seeking to replace the 1991 document. Second, there was a strong desire by the authors to correct mistaken readings of the 1991 paper regarding the relative roles of the market and state in skills development. Third, a major focus of the 2004 report was on the experience of the Bank, other agencies and partner countries in implementing the recommendations of the 1991 policy. Fourth, the report allowed the global themes of the 1991 policy to be explored in far greater depth in one regional context. Fifth, the 2004 report also developed the analysis of its predecessor further by stressing additional issues such as qualifications frameworks and quality assurance systems, which had not been significant international policy issues in 1991. Thus, the 2004 report complements and extends the earlier analysis rather than revising it.
What is apparent is that the 2004 report is being used by those working on and in Africa. Relevant government officials in several countries do seem to have read the report. Whether this reading builds on an awareness of the earlier policy document or not, it is evident that many officials are well versed in the major arguments of the report and accept the power of its analysis.
From my familiarity with recent doctoral theses on African skills development it is also apparent that the report and its series of supporting papers are being used in developing new analytical work on African skills development, even where the researchers are not particularly supportive of important elements of the analysis.
However, there are some important limitations on the current, and likely future, impact of the 2004 report. First, as the authors admit, implementation of the 1991 policy has been limited in a number of cases due to power dynamics and a reluctance of partner countries to rigorously adopt and implement its ideas. From my own experiences in the region, it appears that there are officials who accept that the Bank?s analysis is intellectually robust and the best model available but who still are psychologically reluctant to believe it due to ideological suspicion of the Bank and worries about losing personal and institutional power. As a primarily economic analysis, the report is relatively weak on sociological and political perspectives on the nature of policy making and implementation.
Moreover, the report is refreshingly honest about the Bank?s own limitations in following its own recommendations, particularly with regard to the centrality of rigorous economic analysis to investment decision-making and impact assessment in the skills sector. As the Bank?s own personnel capacity in skills development continues to weaken, there is a risk that such robust analytical work is likely to become less rather than more common. Thus, the report?s important message here may not be heeded internally.
Finally, as skills development begins to return to the policy agenda of agencies and governments in Africa, there is a danger that increasing numbers of non-skills specialists are coming to the sector without a grounding in the existing literature, including the 2004 report. Without continued effort to disseminate the report?s message and to develop relevant capacity within agencies, governments and research communities there is a danger that many of its evidence-based findings will be missed in the rush to rebuild Africa?s skills development systems.
Reference: World Bank (2004) Skills Development in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Bank, Washington
Back to full contents of NORRAG NEW 38.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 38 in pdf.