1 / 18

Private Provision and Public Finance Holland and Denmark

Private Provision and Public Finance Holland and Denmark. Harry Anthony Patrinos World Bank. 11 April 2000. Denmark. Long tradition of freedom in education 28 parents can claim public funds by declaring private school Funding follows students – taximeter 12%+ private; increasing.

lassie
Download Presentation

Private Provision and Public Finance Holland and Denmark

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Private Provision and Public FinanceHolland and Denmark Harry Anthony Patrinos World Bank 11 April 2000

  2. Denmark • Long tradition of freedom in education • 28 parents can claim public funds by declaring private school • Funding follows students – taximeter • 12%+ private; increasing

  3. Numbers of Schoolsover time

  4. Danish Voucher – Taximeter • Activity-based allocation system • Introduced gradually • Open Univ in 1990 • upper sec tech, business colleges in 1991 • private primary, lower sec. schools in 1992 • higher education in 1994 • adult vocational training centers in 1995 • folk high schools, production schools 1996

  5. Advantages of Taximeter System • Demand-driven, result-oriented • Economically rational • Demographic changes reflected • Administrative simplification • Collaboration and coordination

  6. School Choice • Education Act permits private school choice • State covers 80-85% of cost • MoE does not have school inspectors

  7. Local Control • Compulsory education (up to 9th/10th year) municipal responsibility • Schools free to set curriculum, but most follow closely MOE guidelines • Schools financed by municipality, with block grant from state

  8. Conclusions • System does not create problems (OECD) • Teacher unions not opposed • Disappointing performance TIMSS, PISA • No mechanism for disseminating results • Demand for information is growing stronger

  9. Education Expenditure and Achievement TIMSS Ranking Maths Science 28 17 8 25 12 8 18 18 26 20 27 34 3 3 9 6 24 22 31 27 6 2 2 4 14 9 United States Switzerland Austria Canada Norway Denmark Japan Netherlands New Zealand Spain Czech Rep. Korea Hungary 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 Expenditure/student

  10. Holland • 1917: ‘schools to the parents’ • Freedom of education • Schools provide profiles, government publishes information • Now, push for…privatization?

  11. Private & Public Shares,Primary, 1850-2000 (%)

  12. Private & Public Shares,Secondary, 1850-2000 (%)

  13. Primary Schools by Orientation Source: Hupe & Meijs 2000

  14. Targeted Funds for Low-Income and Minorities • For minority student, school receives 1.9 times basic amount • For native Dutch from low income background, school receives 1.25 times basic amount

  15. Framework • Regulations • Large central staff • School advisory services; coordination bodies • Education Inspectorate

  16. Conclusions Advantages • Choice • Achievement • Small schools – private efficient (shop around) Disadvantages • Risk schools • Equity – segregation • Cost: extra $300 million (1987)

  17. Summary • Denmark: • Freedom • Choice • But achievement relatively low • Holland • Choice and private delivery • Achievement high • But regulations heavy

  18. Lessons • Funding students can work • Freedom/choice and achievement complicated • Private market and regulations possible • Funding individual and private delivery can be adapted, with or without heavy regulations

More Related