Rebuild In Depth: Education...!!!!!!!!

Education is one of the most important ways in which countries have succeeded in broadening social participation in a growing national economy.

Agenda:

1) What specific improvements can be made in the Education for All architecture and the global push to provide quality basic education for all children, youth and adults?
2) How can the international community help countries extend the reach and capacity of their higher education systems?

Key Points

• There is good news and bad news in the lead up to the 2015 deadline for the Millennium Development Goals on education. Primary school enrolment rates in most developing countries are rising faster than ever before, but 72 million children remain out of primary school.

• A major transformation of the global education architecture is needed. The solution is a networked organizational approach – a complex adaptive system supported by sustainable funding and delivered by integrated cooperation among stakeholders.

• The finance gap and the people gap must be bridged – US$ 16 billion is needed to meet the Education for All targets and in the next five years 10 million teachers are needed to replace retirees.

• New financing mechanisms such as social investments are needed to provide seed capital for educational innovation.

• Skills portfolios developed through tertiary education and vocational training must respond to the needs of the job market if today’s young people are to become leaders and socially responsible individuals.

Synopsis

The numbers tell the story. Most developing countries have made significant progress: primary school enrolment rates there are rising faster than ever before and the countries with the lowest enrolment rates are those that are increasing the fastest. Niger has doubled enrolment and Rwanda is almost at 100%. These achievements should be celebrated.

However, 72 million children remain out of primary school, 759 million adults are lacking basic literacy skills and just one-fifth of teenagers attend secondary school. Several developing countries report that the quality of learning outcomes is declining, which could result in a social crisis. Delaying a rethink of today’s global architecture in education will mean a critical shortage of leaders and socially responsible individuals capable of addressing the increasingly complex challenges of the 21st century.

The Global Redesign Initiative and process seek to achieve quality education for all because “education is everybody’s business”. The proposals are “ambitious but achievable” in that they do not call for new institutions. A networked, organizational approach is needed. Networks comprised of diverse coalitions are the way forward, based on successful models such as the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

The first step would be to conduct a multistakeholder review – that includes young people – of the governance and supporting institutional architecture of the Education for All effort, currently being led by UNESCO with the ambitious goal to meet the learning needs of children, youth and adults by 2015. This “hard hitting” review, conducted by an International Education Architecture Committee, should develop a blueprint by the end of 2011 and enlist the G20 leaders to endorse concrete proposals during a ministerial meeting in 2012.

It is time to focus on the “how to” rather than the “must do” and to rethink the incentive structure. Why should young people pursue education? The perceptions of the returns of education are not high enough. Education is about creating human capital, which is the springboard for a wide range of other capitals, such as social capital, civic capital and political capital, to name a few.

Innovative financing mechanisms, such as social investments, cannot replace reliable funding from local government and donors. However, new approaches to raising and delivering finance at the local and global levels could lead to significant improvements in the sector in terms of quality and access. The sector should emulate the health and other sectors that have promoted a results-driven culture of social entrepreneurship and secured private sector support. The private sector has a key role to play not only as a funder, but also as a partner in creating innovative models that can be scaled up. Venture capital models need to be deployed to absorb risk, which is inherent in innovation.

Tertiary education and vocational training must respond to the needs of today and tomorrow’s job market. Students need to be equipped with portable, flexible skills portfolios, particularly in the context of lifelong learning. In Australia, for example, trade unions representing teachers worked together in partnership with business to map out what skills will be needed. Several companies have undertaken teacher training initiatives as well as invested in research to determine the skill set needed to meet this century’s challenges.

Teacher professional development needs ongoing support as the pace of change in the field is accelerating and teachers must apply the art of teaching to enable every child to achieve her or his potential as a person and as a member of society. Pedagogical methods must evolve. For example, interactive learning and online collaborative models are needed instead of using teachers as mere data transmitters. Several participants pointed out that attempts to foster an entrepreneurial spirit and a culture of innovation are being thwarted by an educational system that discourages critical thinking. When redesigning education systems, it is critical to include student/learner centred models.

Harnessing the potential of new technologies is not only about providing online learning. IT can unleash the power to change today’s model of pedagogy, which is teacher focused and based on a one-size-fits-all curriculum. Interactive learning, where teachers organize experiences, is a much richer experience.

Happy Reading..!!!!!!!!!!!

Tackling Corruption, Enhancing Competitiveness ...!!!!

Conservative estimates place the magnitude of corruption at as much as 5% of annual GDP in some of Asia's most dynamic economies, causing business losses in the millions, higher crime rates and severe social suffering. How can regional leaders step up the fight against corruption and create better incentives for corporate governance?

Key Points

• Corruption has been exacerbated by the increasing complexity and opacity of global supply chains.

• Illicit trade is inextricably intertwined with corruption: it is enabled by corruption, and the money generated through illicit trade funds corruption.

• Good corporate governance practices are being passed from multinational to national companies, which are now taking on the mantle of fighting corporate corruption.

• Streamlining government and implementing electronic systems that improve transparency can minimize opportunities for corruption: every form or stamp is a chance to take a bribe.

Synopsis

Corruption remains a deep-rooted and pervasive problem worldwide, with globalization presenting both new opportunities for corruption and increased challenges in identifying and attacking it. But increasingly governments are recognizing that it is not a victimless crime – that it enables, and is in turn encouraged by, other forms of criminal activity, and that it often impacts the poorest, most at-risk strata of society.

Corporations, both multinationals and national companies, are recognizing that corruption is not the competitive advantage it may once have been perceived to be.

US firms that initially complained of being hobbled in competition by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act are now realizing that it has been a blessing: US multinationals are solicited for bribes less often, and contracts come under less scrutiny. And firms that once operated under the belief that gradations of acceptable behaviour were necessary across different geographies are now realizing that a single set of ethical standards better serves their interests.

Asia’s Next Generation of Innovation ....!!!!!!!!!

In Asia's emerging markets, the appetite of youthful populations for connectivity and content is illustrated through tremendous uptake in innovative mobile technologies, but technological development continues to come largely from mature economies such as South Korea and Japan.

How can Asia's tigers develop the right ecosystem so innovation takes root and creates home-grown, cutting edge technologies?

Key Points

• Asia’s demographics, rising Internet penetration and its young techno-savvy population are all fuelling the drive for innovative technologies, products and processes

• Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, China, are at the forefront of the drive, but countries such as China and India are catching up, propelled by the sheer size of the domestic market and the competitiveness of their industries

• Reverse innovation where R&D takes place in Asia and products are sold in developed markets is happening as investments and consumption continue to rise in this part of the world.

• Most new ideas are coming out of small companies and entrepreneurs, but to help them take those ideas to global markets, governments will need to step up with a supportive business environment, including efficient infrastructure, IP protection, funding and tax incentives.

• With the exception of Singapore, ASEAN countries continue to lag behind in innovation and will need to invest a lot more in education as well as create a stable environment for investors and entrepreneurs to lay roots

Synopsis

Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, China, have been leaders in technological developments in Asia but China and India, with youthful demographics and economic growth on their side, are catching up fast. Reverse innovation, where the research and development are carried out in Asia and the products sold in developed Western markets, is also beginning to take place.

Many of the new products and processes being developed are having a profound impact on the daily lives of millions of people. Examples include an e-mobile payment system that helps farmers save a day trip to the market, Tata’s US$ 2,000 car in India and MicroKit, an automated diagnostic system developed in Singapore that can detect diseases from a small sample of body fluid or tissue.

In the past, innovations have tended to emerge from laboratories but today they are as likely to come from small companies employing less than 20 people. Indeed an EU study showed that France has lagged behind in innovation because 85% of its companies employ more than 100 people. Small companies are more focused on innovations, often because they have no choice. The alternative is a prohibitively higher cost of operation, which could threaten their survival. At the same time, the funding cost for new start-ups has dropped considerably making it easier for entrepreneurs with good ideas to get going.

While the US and Europe lead in research innovation, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, China, have made their mark in product and process innovations.

Most ASEAN countries, with the exception of Singapore and to some extent Malaysia, have a way to go to get in the innovation game. They need to increase investments in education, produce an adequate supply of engineers and create a more conducive business environment..

Happy Reading…..!!!!!!!!!

Defining “Green” in Business.!!!!!!!!

There is no commonly shared definition of what “green” means across industries. How are businesses defining “green”, and how do they assess and measure the sustainability of their operations?

Key Points

• The UN Brundtland Commission defines “green” as meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

• Whatever the definition, governance and grassroots involvement are needed to create the fundamental shift required.

• Inspiration rather than coercion is the most sustainable way to drive green behaviour.

• Energy will be a key element, both in terms of where it comes from and how it is used.

• Hard benchmarks and standards will be needed to judge greenness.

Synopsis

Companies used to define success by their size, their sales turnover and how much value they extract from the business. These old-style big firms are disappearing as sustainability is redefined in both financial and economic terms.

There is a need for a shift of values to be reflected in the laws of countries, practices of business and behaviour of individuals. This drive should include oversight by a new governance system, one that goes beyond the boundaries of national sovereignty and is more powerful than the United Nations.

Sticks are necessary in terms of regulation, but there are limits to coercion. Incentives are also important, but there are fewer carrots to go around in a recession. Both are transaction-based, short term motivators.

The better answer is inspiring grassroots involvement, which is cheap, renewable and clean. Companies are already recognizing this in an effort to connect with consumers on human, social environmental values – on green values. For companies, out-greening the competition will be the new way to outperform.

There are three levels of challenges on energy: security, independence and climate change. Meeting the third challenge requires development of renewable technologies and a low-carbon portfolio approach. Nuclear is a proven technology that can be part of the mix. On the demand side, there is a need to manage the way energy is produced and consumed.

Judging “green” can happen on several evolutionary levels: regulatory compliance, voluntary standards (such as ISO), social responsibility as recognized by local communities, private sector engagement on benchmarking and setting “green” standards. Standards by which the greenness of companies and governments is measured should be part of defining “green”.

Other Key Takeaways

• The world needs to do more than just relaunch growth, which is the theme of this Meeting. It needs to launch better growth, and green growth is the only growth that is truly sustainable in economic or environmental terms.

• Certain new technologies will evolve, but many already exist. To get them in place, the right regulations and incentives are needed. One example is power factor correction, which is a 30-year-old technology that could be implemented in all electric and electronic devices to reduce energy consumption at no extra cost.

Happy Reading…!!!!!!!!