Education is in itself a fundamental human right. As an important determinant of economic growth and human development, education also constitutes an indispensable means of realizing other human rights, particularly rights associated with employment and social security. With the unleashed force of globalization sweeping all aspects of social and economic life, national governments throughout the world increasingly understand the strategic importance of education in enhancing and maintaining international competitiveness, and its crucial role in developing economic and social viability on the long run. On the other hand, the convergent impacts of globalization also bring new impetus for cross-boarder education, and affect the shape and mode of the operation of national education systems more influentially than ever. Over the last two decades trade in cross-border education has been increasing steadily in all forms: not only the numbers of students enrolled in educational institutions outside their home country has been rapidly increasing, but also more and more education providers operate abroad, providing their educational services to foreign students who remain at home. Accelerated development of the new information and communication technologies also facilitate cross-border education and encourage new forms of educational internationalization. According to the statistics from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), export revenue related to international student mobility amounted to an estimated minimum of US$30 billion in 1998, or 3% of global services exports (OECD, 2004a).
With the rapid growth of trade in education, a number of bilateral, regional and multilateral trade agreements and regulations have incorporated provisions on trade and investment in educational services, which all together make up the legal and institutional framework shaping and regulating the liberalization of trade in educational services. Among all the relevant agreements and regulations driving the liberalization process, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) under the World Trade Organization (WTO) regime provides the first multilateral framework for international trade and investment in services, including educational services.
Table of Contents
I Introduction
II Institutional Frameworks and Contexts
2.1 Norms and standards of Human Rights most relevant to Liberalization of Trade in Educational Services
2.2 Liberalization of Trade in Educational Services
2.2.1 Trade in Services and Trade in Educational Services in Particular
2.2.2 The framework of GATS in WTO regime
Background, Objective, scopes
Coverage, Exemption and Modes of Supply
Structure, Core Components and Key Features
III Theoretical Framework
3.1 Trade and Welfare
3.1.1 Gains of Free Trade
3.1.2 Distributional Effect and Overall Welfare
3.1.3 Protection and Loss of Welfare
3.2 Market Failure and Government Intervention
3.2.1 Market Failure Argument
3.2.2 Theory of the Second Best and Principle of Targeting
3.3 Public Goods, Externalities and Education
3.3.1 Definition and Characteristics of Public Goods
3.3.2 Is Education a Public Good?
3.3.3 Financing and Provision of Public Goods: the Case of Education
3.4 A Summary of the Theory Section
IV Does Liberalization of Trade in Educational Services Promote or Threaten the Right to Education?
4.1.1 About the availability and accessibility
4.1.2 About State Accountability
4.1.3 About the Equity
4.1.4 About the Quality
4.1.5 About Long-term Economic, Social and Cultural Impacts
4.2 Country Case study: Examining the Impact of Liberalization in Trade of Educational Service on the Right to Education in China
4.2.1 China’s Education System and Problems
Basic facts about China's education system
Key Problems impeding the Right to Education: Financial Obstacle and Regional Imbalance
The Growth of Private Provision
4.2.2 International Trade in Educational Service in China
International Trade Related Regulatory Environment and China's GATS Commitments
Current Trade in Educational Services
Market Demand and Consumer Psychology: A Nation-wide Survey (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2002)
4.2.3 Challenges and Opportunities
Access and Equity
Quality Issue
Brain Drain
V Summary and Conclusion
Objectives and Scope of the Thesis
The primary objective of this thesis is to examine the relationship between the liberalization of trade in educational services and the fundamental right to education. The study explores whether trade liberalization, specifically within the GATS framework, poses a threat to the realization of the right to education or if it can serve as a complementary force for its promotion, with a specific focus on the context of China.
- The role of international trade and GATS in the education sector.
- Economic theories regarding trade, welfare, public goods, and market failure.
- The potential for both challenges (e.g., inequity, brain drain) and opportunities (e.g., expanded access, improved quality) stemming from liberalization.
- The specific case of China's educational system, regulatory environment, and its GATS commitments.
- The necessity for balanced domestic and international policy measures to protect the right to education while engaging with global trade dynamics.
Excerpt from the Book
3.3.2 Is Education a Public Good?
Opinions are divided on whether education is a public good in various articles and books. To a great extend the non-rivalry criterion is fulfilled as in the traditional form of education, the attendance of a student in a class usually doesn’t diminish other students learning. But in this case strict non-rivalry is not possible, because an overcrowded class may result in a decreasing learning effect. The modern IT-born education has obviously no such concern since it can be disseminated virtually to possible great number of consumers through Internet. Yet all forms of education are exclusionary. It is perfectly feasible to exclude students from access to schools by setting a high tuition in the conventional education form, or from access to online educational service with a password required. Thus, education is not strictly a public good, and should, at least partially, be interpreted as a private good.
However, though not truly a public good in this sense, education does possess some externalities, which are defined as activities on the part of one party that enters directly into another party's utility or production function (Buchanan and Stubblebine, 1962). Sufficient evidences prove that education, like many other public goods, can produce positive social, non-market, outcomes. Influences of education may be radiated to the whole society through the education receiver’s behaviour. Education is not only a strong impetus for economic growth by directly providing qualified human capital, but also a cultural and scientific asset for individuals and society. Initial level and changes of education are positively correlated with economic growth.
Summary of Chapters
I Introduction: This chapter introduces education as a fundamental human right and highlights the growing global trend of trade in educational services, framing the research question regarding the compatibility of liberalization and human rights.
II Institutional Frameworks and Contexts: This section details the international legal framework governing the right to education and the WTO's GATS agreement as the primary regulatory structure for trade in services.
III Theoretical Framework: This part provides a comprehensive economic analysis, covering the gains from trade, the market failure argument, and public goods theory as they apply to education.
IV Does Liberalization of Trade in Educational Services Promote or Threaten the Right to Education?: This chapter discusses the controversies, arguments, and counter-arguments surrounding liberalization, and includes a detailed case study of China's education system and the potential impacts of trade policies.
V Summary and Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the main findings, suggesting that liberalization and human rights objectives are not irreconcilable if managed with sound domestic and international regulatory policies.
Keywords
Liberalization, Education, Right to Education, GATS, WTO, Public Goods, Market Failure, Trade, China, Human Rights, Economic Policy, Privatization, Higher Education, Educational Services, Brain Drain
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this master thesis?
The thesis focuses on analyzing the impact of trade liberalization in educational services on the fulfillment of the fundamental right to education, particularly in the context of the WTO's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The study spans international trade law, human rights law, economic theory (public goods and market failure), and educational development policy, with a specific practical case study of China.
What is the central research question?
The research explores whether the liberalization of educational trade is in conflict with the obligation of states to ensure the right to education, or if it can be reconciled as a means to achieve broader educational access and quality.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The thesis utilizes an interdisciplinary approach, primarily basing its analysis on international trade theories and public goods theory, while consistently applying a human rights-based perspective to evaluate policy outcomes.
What does the main body of the work address?
The main body examines the theoretical rationales for government intervention in education, the potential risks and benefits of trade liberalization in this sector, and evaluates the situation in China regarding its education system, private provision, and GATS commitments.
Which keywords best describe this study?
Key terms include liberalization, right to education, GATS, public goods, market failure, China, and brain drain.
How does the thesis view the role of the Chinese government?
The author argues that while China faces severe budget constraints and educational disparities, the government remains crucial for regulating the market and ensuring that liberalization serves public objectives rather than purely commercial ones.
What conclusion does the author draw regarding "brain drain"?
The author identifies brain drain as a significant risk for developing countries like China, where the emigration of high-skilled individuals in pursuit of international education can jeopardize long-term development, necessitating proactive policy measures to secure return and career opportunities.
- Citation du texte
- Li Zhou (Auteur), 2006, Liberalization of trade in educational service and its impact on the right to education, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/79643
