GCRF Development Award: The Political Economy of Education Research (PEER) Network

几乎一半失学儿童生活在受冲突影响的国家（24个国家中至少有2700万儿童）。这些国家的儿童在5岁生日前死亡的可能性是其他国家的两倍，而冲突国家的男女不平等现象最为严重，识字率也最低。高质量的教育可以保护儿童免受暴力侵害，提供有关健康和安全的救生信息，以及在冲突后生存、恢复和重建社会的知识、技能和态度。然而，在冲突局势中，教育往往被置于较低的优先地位。我们知道，现代冲突可能持续20多年，往往涉及多个武装团体争夺对政府机构（如学校）、自然资源和领土的控制。这也意味着，在冲突情况下，教育的提供可能被高度政治化，这可能会阻止最需要的援助到达最需要的人手中——通常是最贫穷或最边缘化的人遭受暴力冲突的最严重后果。教育通常被认为是“一件好事”，但我们知道，在某些情况下，教育实际上可能是“问题的一部分”，也是“解决方案的一部分”。例如，受教育机会不平等和教育资源分配不平等可能加剧社会各群体之间的不满情绪，特别是如果他们已经处于冲突之中。将少数人的声音排除在决策之外会引起怨恨。在教学语言或课程内容方面不敏感或带有政治偏见的教育政策，可能助长陈规定型观念、仇外心理和其他敌对情绪，从而在不同种族、宗教或文化群体之间造成不信任。因此，我们需要更好地理解为什么某些形式的教育可能使冲突恶化的潜在政治、经济和社会原因。这被称为政治经济分析（PEA），与受冲突影响国家的教育提供高度相关。然而，目前的方法存在一些问题。依靠国际顾问进行“一次性”评估，这些评估缺乏对当地历史、政治、文化和权力关系知识的敏感性，而这些知识更能用当地语言传达。还有一种倾向是忽视国际机构对国家政策和做法的影响以及在一个国家不同地区运作的不同政治环境。人们往往不愿提出有关教育提供的关键问题，因为这些问题太敏感或可能挑战既得利益。这些严重限制了分析改善社会公正教育制度的规划和发展的潜力。

Almost half of all children who are out of school live in conflict affected countries (at least 27 million children in 24 countries). Children in these countries are twice as likely to die before their fifth birthday and countries with conflict have some of the largest inequalities between girls and boys and the lowest literacy levels in the world. Good quality education can protect children from violence and provide life-saving messages concerning health and safety, as well as the knowledge, skills and attitudes to survive, recover and rebuild their society after conflict. Yet, education is often given a low priority in situations of conflict.We know that modern conflicts can last more than 20 years and often involve multiple armed groups competing for control of government institutions [such as schools], natural resources and territory. This also means that provision of education can be highly politicised in situations of conflict and this can prevent much needed assistance reaching those who need it most - it is usually the poorest or most marginalised who suffer the worst consequences of violent conflict. Education is usually considered 'a good thing', but we know that in certain circumstances education may actually be 'part of the problem' as well as 'part of the solution'. For example, unequal access to education and distribution of education resources may fuel grievances between groups in society, particularly if they are already in conflict. Exclusion of minority voices from decision-making will cause resentment. Insensitive or politically biased education policies in terms of the language of instruction or content of the curriculum may create mistrust between different ethnic, religious or cultural groups by fuelling stereotypes, xenophobia and other antagonisms. We therefore need to better understand the underlying political, economic and social reasons why some forms of education may make conflict worse. This is known as Political Economy Analysis (PEA) and is highly relevant to the provision of education in conflict affected countries. However, there are problems with current approaches. There is a reliance on international consultants to undertake 'one-off' assessments that lack sensitivity to local history, politics, culture and knowledge of power-relations that are better conveyed in local languages. There is also a tendency to ignore the impact that international agencies have on national policy and practices and the different political circumstances that operate in different parts of a country. There is often a reluctance to raise critical questions about education provision because they are too sensitive or may challenge vested interests. These severely limit the potential of analysis to improve the planning and development of socially just education systems.