In Global Peace Through The Global University
System
2003 Ed. by T. Varis, T. Utsumi, and W. R. Klemm
University of Tampere, Hameenlinna, Finland
Objectives
and Institutionalisation
of
the
Global University System *
Marco Antonio R. Dias
Special Assistant to the Rector of
the United Nations University
Former Director of the Division of
Higher Education of UNESCO
* This is based on the Paper contributed to the Final Report of the workshop on "Emerging Electronic Global Distance Learning" at the University of Tampere, Finland (9 to 13 August 1999).
In the presentation of the workshop on "Emerging Electronic Global Distance Learning" held at the University of Tampere, in Finland from 9 to 13 August 1999, the organizers of that event declared that "the digital revolution and economic globalisation are taking us into a new era. We are moving towards the global
knowledge society where information, skills and competence become the driving
forces of social and economic development. The problems associated with this transformation cannot any
longer be solved by traditional means.
Effective learning requires upgraded multimedia educational materials
which can only be used with the broadband Internet."
Few
people disagree with this point of view.
Probably, we are facing a transformation in the economy, in society and
in civilization that is more important than the changes that occurred in the
world during the industrial revolution.
Learning, knowledge, information have now become the pilots of world
society. However, it is important
not to confuse information with knowledge. Information is a set of data to which one has access. Knowledge presupposes an ability to
learn and a cognitive capacity.
In the
political domain, this distinction is essential to allow citizens to take a
stand when confronted by the kind of manipulation they face at present. In the economic sector, there is a
fundamental difference today between those who conceive the industrial products
- the most important
element - and their
production. The conception aspect
is linked to research and development based on science and the codification of
theoretical knowledge.
Martin Carnoy, a North-American professor,
researcher and author, wrote in a recent book on the new economic science that
low salaries and low prices on raw materials are no longer enough to ensure a
country a place in the world table.
He added:
"People's work has shifted from the production of agricultural and manufactured goods to the production of services and to increasingly sophisticated services at that. The main ingredient in these new services is knowledge - knowledge that increases productivity, provides a closer fit between a client's specific needs and the services delivered, and create possibilities for the development of new products and new services. With more competition, knowledge also
becomes increasingly important in manufacturing and agriculture. Quality of production, design, efficient organization, new products, customized production, and just-in-time delivery are the knowledge-intensive aspects dominating today's manufacturing and agricultural activities in both developed countries and the export sectors of developing countries."
Along the same lines of thinking, Ambassador Ricupero, Secretary General of UNCTAD (the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development), used to say that " ... today, what really makes the difference between success and failure is the capacity of competition based on technology, science and knowledge."
The ILO (the International Labour
Organization) also confirmed this in its report on employment in the world in
1998-1999, in which it stated that education and technical training are two
essential elements for the competitiveness of a country.
The
ILO pointed out that the wealth of nations is currently based on the knowledge
and qualifications of its labour power.
A strategy of education and training, which includes three basic
elements, will create the conditions to overcome obstacles linked to
globalisation through a renewed competitiveness, combined with the reduction of
increasing inequalities observed in the labour market. These three elements are:
a)
to develop knowledge and the skills
required to make the country competitive at the international level;
b)
to guide policies and education
programmes to stimulate the reduction of negative effects of globalisation;
c)
to relieve, through education and
training, the increasing vulnerability of certain categories of the population:
women, young people, less qualified workers, all lacking education and skills
and condemned to become poor.
Solidarity or Exclusion
In
the face of this reality, what will be the results of this new era in social
terms? At the end of the day, will
the new society be a better one, will the 21st century be known as
the century of democratisation, or are we at the beginning of a new era of
concentration, elitism and, as a consequence, exclusion?
When in 1999, the UNDP (the United
Nations Development Programme) launched its annual version of the World Human
Report, it was clear that new technologies and globalisation were the main
elements discussed by this United Nations University at that moment. The "final judgement" was
rigorous, denouncing the increasing marginalisation of poor countries inside a
global economy dominated by information technologies. Let us mention one unique example: the 29 countries of OECD,
the club of richest countries accounting for 19% of the world population, had
at that time 91% of Internet users.
More than 50% of these users were located in the
United States, which represents only 5% of the world population. Since then, data presented by
international organizations confirm this reality: new technologies have an enormous
potential for the democratisation of knowledge, but once again, the way they
are being developed consolidates the digital divide. This makes it more difficult for them to eliminate barriers
that put them in a weak position when compared to developed countries.
In
this paper, we will present some elements for discussion concerning this
subject and its implication for education, in particular for higher education,
as well as measures being taken (or which can be taken) to increase cooperation
in this field and, as a consequence, narrow the gap among and within countries. This could, and should, constitute a framework for the action of a network such as GUS - the Global University System.
"To meet the challenges of globalisation, it would in fact appear necessary to prepare individuals for a workplace where responsibilities are constantly changing, where vertical management is replaced by networking, where information passes through multiple and informal channels, where initiative-taking is more important than obedience, and where strategies are especially complex because of the expansion of markets beyond national borders. Therefore, education must help individuals to perform tasks for which they were not originally trained, to prepare for a non-linear career path, to improve their team skills, to use information independently, to develop their capacity for improvisation as well as their creativity, and finally to lay the basis of complex thinking linked to the harsh realities of practical life" (Poisson, 1998).
In
the field of higher education, this subject is being discussed at all
international conferences dealing with this level of education. This was particularly true at the World
Conference on Higher Education (WCHE), which took place in Paris, from 5 to 9
October 1998. This conference was
particularly important. Why?
Over
four thousand people attended the WCHE.
Two basic documents - the "World Declaration on Higher Education
for the XXI Century: Vision and Action" and the "Framework for
Priority Action for Change and Development of Higher Education" were
adopted on this occasion and are included in UNESCO's Internet site: http://www.unesco.org/education.
This
was the first time that so many people had come together, within the framework
of an international organization, to talk exclusively about the subject of
higher education. Over 180 countries sent representatives with more than 120 Ministers of Education and/or of Higher Education presiding over their delegations together with members of parliament, representatives from the economic private sector, students' and teachers' unions, national councils of rectors, associations of universities from all over the world, etc. The
challenge was to identify the way ahead for higher education in the coming
century, to analyse its role in the development process and to see how higher
education should be organized in order to cooperate in building a better
society in the future.
There
were five regional preparatory conferences held in Havana, Dakar, Tokyo,
Palermo and Beirut. In the course
of these meetings, it became clear that the twentieth century, in particular
its second half, was the period that will be recorded as the time in which
higher education increased quantitatively in an extraordinary way, with also
qualitative modifications in the systems.
This period, which was one of recession and limitation of funds and
resources, produced significant changes in the organization of the institutions
and systems of higher education, together with permanent monitoring of their
mechanisms and the fulfilment of the goals set.
In
the last ten years, the development of information technologies was also seen
as having allowed for greater cooperation, which could constitute the basis for
both greater solidarity and a strengthening of the different profiles of
people, institutions and countries.
The
use of new communication and information technologies is a predominant theme
that emerged in all preparatory regional conferences for the WCHE. Some conferences highlighted its
importance for relevance and quality, others emphasized the need for
cooperation in this field, others preferred to call attention to its use as a
tool for better management of institutions, that is to say, as an instrument
for attaining the goals of the institutions.
The
outcome of all these discussions was that in Paris, in October 1998, it was a
key subject in all the commission meetings and thematic debates. The text of the Declaration was
carefully revised, and at the end, the participants approved a paragraph (No.
12), under the title of "the potential and the challenge of technology," which read as follows:
"The rapid breakthroughs in new information and communication technologies will further change the way knowledge is developed, acquired and delivered. It is also important to note that the
new technologies offer opportunities to innovate on course content and teaching
methods and to widen access to higher learning. However, it should be borne in mind that new information
technology does not reduce the need for teachers but changes their role in
relation to the learning process and that the continuous dialogue that converts
information into knowledge and understanding becomes fundamental. Higher education institutions should
lead in drawing on the advantages and potential of new information and
communication technologies, ensuring quality and maintaining high standards for
education practices and outcomes in a spirit of openness, equity and
international co-operation by:
a) engaging in networks,
technology transfer, capacity building, developing teaching materials and
sharing experience of their application in teaching, training and research,
making knowledge accessible to all;
b) creating new learning
environments, ranging from distance education facilities to complete virtual
higher education institutions and systems, capable of bridging distances and
developing high-quality systems of education, thus serving social and economic advancement
and democratisation as well as other relevant priorities of society, while
ensuring that these virtual education facilities, based on regional,
continental or global networks, function in a way that respects cultural and
social identities;
c) noting that, in making
full use of information and communication technology (ICT) for educational
purposes, particular attention should be paid to removing the grave
inequalities which exist among and also within the countries of the world with
regard to access to new information and communication technologies and to the
production of the corresponding resources;
d) adapting ICT to
national, regional and local needs and securing technical, educational,
management and institutional systems to sustain it;
e) facilitating through
international co-operation, the identification of the objectives and interests
of all countries, particularly the developing countries, equitable access and
the strengthening of infrastructures in this field and the dissemination of
such technology throughout society;
f) closely following the evolution of the 'knowledge society' in order to ensure high quality and equitable regulations for access to prevail;
g) taking the new possibilities created by the use of ICT into account, while realising that it is, above all, institutions of higher education that are using ICTs in order to modernize their work, and not ICTs transforming institutions of higher education from real to virtual institutions."
It
is essential to highlight that during the preparations for the WCHE, it became
clear that before defining the kind of university to be built, it is essential
to agree on the kind of society we are looking for. As it was stated in the preamble of the Declaration, everybody agreed that "on the eve of a new century, there is an unprecedented demand for, and a great diversification in higher education, as well as an increased awareness of its vital importance for socio-cultural and economic development, and for building the future, for which the younger generations will need to be equipped with new skills, knowledge and ideals." Solidarity and equity were present in
all the debates and constituted a conceptual basis for all principles defined
in the Declaration and all actions defined in the Priority Framework for Action
adopted by the Conference.
Education as a
Service or as a Right?
An
important debate is currently taking place within universities but also among
researchers, diplomats and governmental sectors all over the world. Can education be considered as a
commercial service and, as a result, regulated by the World Trade Organization
(WTO)?
If
the reply is positive, does this mean that the rules and principles of GATS
(the General Agreement on Trade in Services) apply to education or should it be
considered as a public service?
What
are the implications of the answer to this question? And if the idea of public service is retained, what are the
principles that must guide the organization, content and policies for higher
education in developing countries in general?
On
the other side, on 23 September 1998, the WTO secretariat issued a document
which, after explaining that rapid changes are taking place in the area of
higher education, concluded on the need to include this level of education in
the list of trade in international services.
For
many representatives of the academic world, this contradicts the decision taken
by more than 180 government representatives during the WCHE in Paris in 1998,
when it was stated that higher education must be considered as a public
service, independently of the juridical nature of the institution providing
it. For a service to be
considered public, its provision must first of all be implemented on an equal
basis, it must be continuous and permanent, and no bet subject to any kind of
discrimination, including commercial or financial ones. This, in the view of the entire
academic community, applies to education and, in particular, to higher
education. It is evident in this
debate that this notion of public service is implicit. In concrete terms, a public service
(the provision of water, for example) or the development and management of
public transport, can be entrusted to the private sector, under regulations
issued by public authorities.
Everyone must have the right to drinkable water, independently of which
organization provides this service.
Concerning higher education - and this is a matter of principle - the academic community and the representatives of more than 180 countries considered it to be a public service, which must be accessible to all on the basis of merit, no kind of discrimination being acceptable.
The
GATS (the Global Agreement on Trade Services), approved in 1994, included a
series of principles and measures that have implications for higher education
if it is in fact treated as a commodity (definition of governmental services,
the principle of most favoured nation, national treatment, etc).
In the document mentioned above, the WTO Secretariat (S/C/W/49) stated that "education is normally regarded as a 'public consumption' item, provided in many instances free of charge or at prices not reflecting the costs of producing it."
However, the WTO Secretariat also observed "education also exists as a 'private consumption' item with a price determined freely by the providing institutions." It added that the "consequences of this shift in control have included less government funds, more competition and institutional reforms to cut costs and raise revenues. These, in turn, have resulted in an effort to attract more fee-paying students, including foreign ones." From this statement, and based on a reality - the commercialisation is a fact in many countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand and is also an important element in the list of exports of these countries - the WTO Secretariat went even further and concluded on the need to incorporate higher education in the list of trade in international services.
What really
plays an important role in the discussions related to these issues is the fact
that billions of dollars are part of the game. Merrill Lynch, the North American Investment Bank, has
calculated that the world knowledge market in 1999 reached 9.4 billions dollars. Furthermore, this sum could amount to
more than 53 billion dollars before the year 2003, estimated this bank.
In May
1992, the United States government, together with the World Bank and OECD,
organised a meeting on these issues in Washington. As indicated in one of the working documents, "until recently, education has been largely absent from the debate on globalisation because it was thought to be essentially a non-traded service. But this is not the case. Trade in educational services is already a major business in some countries, e.g., in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States". Australia, in fact, exported US$6 million worth of higher
education in 1970 and increased its production in higher education to over 2
billion in 2000. According to the
same source, during the past year, the amount of money in the higher education
market of OECD countries reached a total of US$30 billion.
WTO
plays a legislative role and its Members are obliged to adapt their laws to its
rules and agreements. It also has
judicial functions through the Dispute Settlement Body. Recently, and this is a just one
example, Brazil was called upon to change its constitution in order to adapt to
decisions taken by WTO concerning the ownership of communication enterprises.
For
many analysts, the creation of WTO and the adoption by its Member States of the
principles included in GATS has, in fact, created a global economic government
and many of them feel that the way globalisation is being implemented favours
the developed world in particular.
As a consequence, proposals are being submitted to stimulate a fairer
sharing of the results of this process.
UNCTAD, the United Nations University, the United Nations Secretariat in New York itself and other organizations are looking for "globalisation with a human face," in which the UNU system should play the central role. The new technologies should help to
reduce the gap between nations and even inside countries, and they cannot be
dominated by one single nation or by a small group of nations.
As stated by the Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja, during an address at the University for Peace in Costa Rica on 28 November 2001, "The United Nations is the most universal forum for global governance". Mr. Tuomioja clearly shows that globalisation is a process that "has multiplied its effects and presented us with vastly enhanced opportunities, but also new challenges".
And among these challenges related to globalisation, he notes, "the increase of wealth and prosperity is being distributed more unequally than before, between and inside countries and regions as well as globally."
Now,
with changes in the Directorate of WTO, a movement is under way to reform the
WTO itself. Better participation
of developing countries in the decision-making process, greater transparency in
discussions and decisions taken by the organization, closer links with other
multilateral organizations, a more equitable sharing of the results of the
trade process, with the elimination, for example, of subsidies for the agricultural
products of the richest countries, should be part of these reforms. This issue was the object of in-depth
analyses published recently in two books, edited under the auspices of the
United Nations University (Sampson, 2001; Nayyar, 2002).
The
arguments put forward by WTO used to have a great impact on many analysts,
impressed by the fact that the commercialisation of education is a clear
tendency and that the presence of private universities, even in European
countries where the public service is a tradition, is increasing
substantially. Today, in a country
such as Brazil, almost 80% of university students are enrolled in private
institutions.
However,
this kind of consideration is a great mistake. The existence of private providers does not justify adopting
the principle of transforming education into a commodity. As several other public services,
the provision of education can be entrusted, delegated, or granted to private
persons or institutions, but under rigid regulations and submission to serious
evaluation practices. In fact, the implication
of the question raised by university associations from Europe, North America
and later Latin America was the refusal to adopt the market as a principle to
guide the education and training of citizens.
Is
Globalization with a Human Face Possible?
For
many analysts, this kind of question is the result of the way globalisation is
being implemented. As a reaction,
many organizations and individuals look for globalisation with human face. They insist on the need for a new way
of treating the external debts of developing countries, the promotion of access
of these countries to the market of developed countries free of protectionism,
and as well as access for these countries to decision-making mechanisms inside
financial international organizations, such as World Bank, IMF and WTO, the
reform of the entire multilateral system, which should reflect the interests of
the international community as a whole, and the reinforcement of collaboration
at all levels, including in the area of education, among countries with
cultural, economic or geographic similarities, and finally the elimination of
the digital divide.
Rubens
Ricupero, the Secretary General of UNCTAD, points to the need for initiatives
to implement commitments made in favour of developing countries, related to
such areas as agricultural subsidies, anti-dumping duties, tariff peaks
directed at products exported by developing countries, the absence of
meaningful commitments on the movements of natural persons, the slow removal of
quotas on textiles and clothing, and the promotion of technology transfer.
Even the Secretary General of the UN criticises the system, saying for example that "industrialized countries, it seems, are happy enough to export handmade goods to each other, but from developing countries they will want only raw materials, not finished products. As a result, their average tariffs on the manufactured products they import from developing countries are now four times higher than the ones they impose on products that come mainly from other industrialized countries."
On this
point, the United Nations University seeks to stimulate reflection on the
multilateral system and on the relations between governance and globalisation
at world level. In this context,
in the view of the UNU, governance refers to the
formation and stewardship of the formal and informal rules regulating the
public realm, the arena in which State as well as economic and societal actors
interacts to make decisions. It
describes the modalities, values and institutions employed to organize human
life at all levels, within and between societies.
Matters
related to citizenship are part of this programme. In fact, an analysis of the work undertaken by the UNU (http://www.unu.edu/) in this field shows that
emphasis is given to:
The
start of the twenty-first century, according to the UNU, is witnessing global
interactions on a scale and intensity unparalleled in history - within and
between businesses, governments and people. As global interaction and integration grow, issues of global
governance are becoming more and more critical. Problems, whether economic, social or environmental,
increasingly spill over into neighbouring, and even distant, countries. Policy decisions by governments have
international implications, and truly global problems are emerging. While globalisation offers great potential
to improve human livelihood around the world, there is a concern that the
process is getting out of control.
It is now more than fifty years since the
foundation of the United Nations system and the creation of the Bretton Woods
institutions in 1945. However, the
world changed considerably during the second half of the twentieth century,
matched by equally broad changes in thinking on key issues. Is the present framework of global
governance institutions geared to deal with the challenges of the twenty-first
century? The findings of the study
by the UNU World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU/WIDER) on
the New Roles and Functions of the United Nations and Bretton Woods
Institutions do not seem to suggest this.
This study analyses the latest thinking with regard to cross-border
flows in the areas of trade, finance, technology and labour, and sketches the
contours of institutions and governance that would meet the needs of the world
in the coming 25 years.
The
analysis in this UNU/WIDER study highlights five key points for steering
globalisation:
i) There is a necessity for
a new world view and global message stressing that efficiency and the needs of
the market be balanced by a greater concern for peace, equity and
sustainability.
ii) Better global public
goods must be provided. Just as
markets and societies at the national level require goods (such as clean air
and road signs) and rules (regarding, for example, fair competition and pollution),
so increasing globalisation means that public goods at the global level will be
needed more and more, both as a foundation for efficient global markets and to
ensure that global society gains maximum benefit.
iii) Unbalanced aspects of
globalisation must be resolved.
The various facets of globalisation are proceeding in very different
ways. The openness of global
financial markets, for example, contrasts drastically with the closed nature of
global labour markets.
iv) Institutional innovation
is required in two areas: (a) International Financial Architecture and (b)
International Labour Movements.
The inability of national or global institutions to deal with financial
flows is a critical concern. And
while the cross-border movement of people remains highly restricted by national
governments, the pressure for change is increasing dramatically. The growing disparity in economic
opportunities will be accentuated by demographic factors (aging in
industrialized countries and population growth in developing countries) and the
increasing availability of information about opportunities elsewhere.
v) Reform of the UN and
Bretton Woods Institutions is required.
The UN and BWIs are becoming increasingly marginalized and will need to
improve both their legitimacy and effectiveness to reverse this trend. In order to reinforce their legitimacy, the UN and BWIs will need to make their governance structures more representative - not just of the governments of member countries but also of their people.
It was with this same approach that the World Conference on Higher Education recommended, that "programmes of international cooperation should be based on long-term links of collaboration between institutions in the North and South, designed at promoting cooperation between the North and the South and also inside the South. Priority should
be given to training programmes in developing countries in centres of
acknowledged excellence organized over regional and international networks,
together with short duration crash courses on specialist subjects
overseas. Priority should be given
to creating an environment conducive to attracting and retaining qualified
human resources via national policies or international agreements which would
allow highly competent researchers and experts to return to their countries in
the best possible conditions. This could be achieved via programmes of collaboration which, thanks to their international dimension, would facilitate the full use of endogenous skills."
Since
the end of the eighties, before the WCHE took place, UNESCO launched a debate
and stimulated actions aimed at developing cooperation in higher education
based on equity and solidarity.
Three initiatives should be mentioned at this respect:
1. The launching of the document "Policy Paper for Change and Development in Higher Education."
2. The launching of the document "Open and Distance Learning - Prospects and Policy Considerations" (1997)
3. The launching of the
UNITWIN Programme in 1991
The Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, launched UNESCO's Policy Paper, prepared by the Division of Higher Education, in 1995, after a worldwide reflection. It served as an
instrument for several governments in their reflection on changes in higher
education systems and was the initial basis for the preparation of the World
Conference on Higher Education.
In
fact, after analysing the main current trends in higher education (quantitative
expansion, diversification of structures and forms, constraints on funding and
resources, enhanced internationalisation), the document dealt with the main
challenges for higher education in a changing world, giving an overview of the
major challenges to be faced and presenting the shifting imperatives of
economic and technological development and the new development strategies for
higher education. Finally, the
document treated in detail matters related to:
a)
RELEVANCE (relations with society, higher education and the world of
work, relations with the State, funding, renewal of teaching and learning,
research, responsibility towards other education levels),
b)
QUALITY (staff and programmes, students, infrastructure and academic
environment) and finally,
c)
INTERNATIONALISATION of higher education (principles and forms of
international cooperation, access to knowledge, networking for academic
excellence).
This
document can be found on UNESCO's Internet site. New technologies are mentioned in several parts of the
document (paragraphs No. 23, 36, 43, 73, 75 to 77, 102, 105, 107, 108, 132). According to paragraph No. 76: "Higher education institutions should make greater use of the advantages offered by the advancement of communication technologies. It is now possible, for example, to integrate distance
learning into more traditional study programmes without loss of quality. As a result of such developments, the
distinction between distance and traditional education is becoming
blurred. Alternative delivery
systems are becoming an increasingly viable element in a forward-looking
blueprint for higher education, especially in opening up to a new clientele and
creating flexible strategies in order to overcome the disadvantages associated
with the traditional organization of studies. Co-operation with either public and/or private organizations and associations should be fostered in this respect."
The Policy Paper on Higher Education was completed in 1997 by another policy paper, this one dedicated to "Open and Distance Learning - Prospects and Policy Considerations," a recently revised version (2002) of which can also be found on UNESCO's Internet site.
According to this document, while it is true that "the last two decades have seen considerable growth in educational training É the world still suffers from intolerable inequalities at the international level and sometimes within nations."
News
technologies are examined with a positive approach. "The rapid development of information and communication technologies and the move towards a more knowledge-intensive, interdependent society create new challenges and opportunities for the design and delivery of education."
This document shows that "one of the technological trends is the emergence of new forms of distance learning based on more interactive telecommunications technologies, with pedagogical, economic, and organizational implications. Furthermore, there is a significant
trend towards internationalisation.
Institutional and inter-governmental cooperation is increasing, and the 'global classroom' has been achieved in quite a number of projects, particularly in connection with emerging global communication networks."
However, it has been noted, "in the developing world, open and distance learning suffers from many of the problems faced by conventional education. Additionally, lack of infrastructure
and professional competence in open and distance learning are important
barriers. Nevertheless, these forms of educational delivery have come to stay, and many countries are looking at open and distance learning as a major strategy for expanding access and raising quality."
In
1989, the Member States requested UNESCO's Secretariat to elaborate an
international plan of action for strengthening inter-university cooperation,
with particular emphasis on support for higher education in developing
countries. The UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme, elaborated and implemented by UNESCO's Division of Higher Education, was approved by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1991 and was designed to instil a spirit of solidarity based on linkages, networking and other kinds of cooperation agreements among higher education institutions all over the world aimed, in particular, at benefiting developing countries.
The
UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme favours the creation of networks at the
sub-regional, regional and inter-regional levels among higher education and
research institutions. Its main
element is the UNESCO Chair scheme, conceived as an instrument to offer to
graduate students in developing countries the best opportunities for advanced
training and research in essential disciplines for sustainable development.
The
priority of the cooperation within the framework of this programme was not, as
I stated at a meeting of OECD in September 1992, financial profit obtained
through the results of leading research, which is essential in cooperative
projects among countries of the same level of industrial or scientific
development. The priority in this
case is the transfer of technology and the strengthening of a very solid
programme based on solidarity and knowledge sharing.
This
was the reason why those who actually conceived the programme insisted on the
necessity of reinforcing networks.
The approach was innovative in the sense that priority was given to
networking more than to agreements among individual institutions. In several countries, higher education
institutions are unique in that they are able to train researchers and
undertake research. This applies
to developing countries such as Brazil, but also to countries such as Spain with
its powerful industry. In other
words, any scientific and technological development policy in these countries
is necessarily built by reinforcing university institutions.
An
internal evaluation of this programme was carried out in 1996 and an external
one in 1999. They showed that an
improvement is necessary, especially in terms of coordination. A number of projects did not develop
well but in general, it was considered a success, and this was confirmed by the
interest shown by institutions and governments all over the world.
In
1998, it was pointed out that 308 UNESCO Chairs were created and 42 networks
organized or supported by the programme.
They were established in all regions. At the beginning of 1999 the projects were located in over
400 institutions of more than 90 countries. Today, in 2003, around 600 projects are being developed
within the framework of this programme and an international network, GUNI (the
Global University Network for Innovation) with a secretariat housed in the
Universidad Politecnica de Catalunya (UPC) in Barcelona and based on five
regional networks, stimulates innovative projects to implement the decisions of
the World Conference on Higher Education.
When
launched, the aims of the programme were the following:
1. To give a new impetus to
the inter-university cooperation agreements and to the transfer and sharing of
knowledge, especially in favour of developing countries.
2. To set up a modality for
the rapid transfer/exchange of knowledge and technology in order to reduce the
gap between developed and developing countries.
3. To promote the equal
sharing of skills in the service of justice, solidarity and peace through the
creation and reinforcement of networks and international cooperation.
4. To create or reinforce
specialized studies and advanced research centres having as their focal points
the UNESCO Chairs and functioning through networks, particularly in the South,
in order to ensure the progress of knowledge and its application to the
solution of development problems, with a view to establishing peace and
protecting the environment.
5. To participate in the
academic solidarity movement by mobilizing and supporting the higher education
institutions of developed countries in favour of developing countries.
6. To develop a tool to
achieve the objective of internationalisation of higher education through the
twinning of higher education institutions and exchange of programme.
7. To forge higher
education relations with the world of work on a new basis, starting from a
reciprocal harmonization of action and search for solutions to the pressing
problems of humanity.
The
United Nations University, for its part, is reaching out to partners in
international academia having similar objectives to those of the UNU and
working more with universities around the world, as well as through networks
such as the International Association of Universities, the International
Association of University Presidents, the International Council for Science and
the Inter-Academy Panel of Academies of Science Worldwide.
The
UNU contributes to the Global Development Network (GDN), a major association of
research institutes and think tanks whose goal is to generate and share
knowledge related to development.
Together with UNESCO, UNU implements the decision set out in Paragraph 6
(i) of the Priority Action Framework for the Change and Development of Higher
Education, adopted by the World Conference on Higher Education, which refers to
the creation of a joint UNESCO/UNU Forum on Higher Education. This has, in fact, become the Global
University Innovation Network (GUNI), with headquarters at the Polytechnic
University of Catalunya in Barcelona, Spain.
GUNI
stimulates networking through the utilization of new technologies, which is
also an important part of the UNU programme. Two examples are worth mentioning:
a) The Virtual University
Initiative (VUI) of the UNU
Institute for Advanced Studies (UNU/IAS) in Tokyo provides a new means to
support and foster on-line education, research and dissemination via the
Internet. The VUI is eventually
intended to be a key way for UNU to help bridge the knowledge gap between
developed and developing societies.
It will also function as a support system for United Nations agencies
around the globe by providing them with the option of transferring their
project-based activities to educational and learning modules.
b) The International
Institute for Software Technology (UNU/IIST), located in Macau, China, assists
developing countries in building up their research, development and education
capacities in the field of software technology.
When
establishing its own cooperation projects, GUS should look at successful
examples of cooperation developed both by UNESCO and by the United Nations
University. In the field of new
technologies, a good example of a successful project within the framework of
the UNITWIN Programme was the UNESCO Chair on Information Technologies, based
at the Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canarias in the Canary Islands in the
nineties. Its aims were to define
the cultural and technological basis with a view to stimulating the development
and expansion of information technologies in Northwest Africa (South of
Morocco, Mauritania and Senegal).
In
addition to stimulate the networking of higher education institutions of these
countries, the project was conceived to develop educational technology,
dissemination of scientific documentation and collaboration with institutional
development.
Since
1995, a UNESCO Chair in Communication was created at the University of Quebec
in Montreal (UQAM), which soon became a focal point for a global network. It developed over several years of
activities in the fields of communication and international development,
national information policies and the right to communications, access to
(transfer of) new information and communication technologies (NICT) and their
uses, institutional and organizational communication, media development and
management, public relations, public affairs and advertising and finally
professional training and ethics.
The work was undertaken through closer relations with professional and
industrial communities involved in communications. The network started its operations in Canada and soon
expanded to countries such as Bulgaria, Colombia, Spain, Hungary, Lithuania,
Uruguay, the Russian Federation, and Brazil. Internet was used as an instrument to disseminate
information, the results of researchers and work carried out by the network.
On its side, United Nations University, as part of its activities within the framework of the follow-up of the World Conference on Higher Education, and with the aim of reinforcing the relevance of higher education institutions, decided to support the efforts being undertaken by strengthening the networks and such innovative programmes as the "Anchieta Programme of Inter-university Cooperation" (PACI), the first project of which - a teacher education course
combining traditional presentation methods with distance and virtual education - was elaborated with resources provided by the Cabildo of Gran Canaria (Spain). It was adopted by the State of Minas
Gerais, Brazil, which, during the first stage, started to implement it by
training 15,000 teachers for the first four classes of basic education. The intention is to adapt this programme
later to other regions and countries that express an interest in it.
The
initial matrix of this project is based on the consideration that educational
action cannot be fragmented through isolated tasks but should, instead, be
articulated as a continuing process of action/reflection in which practice is
not separated from theory, since the individuality of the educators and of
those who are educated is considered within the framework of the school and the
community, as well the educational system and society.
The
outcome of this approach should be:
a) To treat teacher
training and pedagogical coordination in an integrated way;
b) To give emphasis to the
process of professionalization;
c) To incorporate
reflections on the present reality of the world, each country and each people
(globalisation, unemployment, advances in science and technology, conflicts and
peace, etc).
The
programme will be developed through seven modules of 454 hours for each
semester. Three areas will be
exploited:
a) knowledge of basic
education;
b) pedagogical methods;
c) integrative axis.
The
elements in this last part constitute the most innovative approach of this
project. It means, in fact, that
during the entire process of training, the teachers will have in mind their
experience in classes and the social environment in which they develop their
functions. They will not be
treated as passive receivers but as people whose experience will be given added
value and will serve as a point of departure to improve their professional
action and stimulate them so that they can actively participate in the process
of improving society and learning how to live together in the twenty-first
century.
Among the topics foreseen in this area,
the following can be mentioned: contemporary culture, informatics, the cinema, theatre,
television, literature, as well as encouraging constant innovation in
curriculum, teaching and learning methods. During this period, the teachers will develop subjects such
as education, family and society; education, society and citizenship; the
school as a field for the practice of pedagogy; a political-pedagogical project
for schools; the organization of the teaching functions; the psycho-social
dynamics of classes; education, theory and practice; and the specific nature of
teaching. This approach can also
create the conditions for a better application of the Recommendation concerning
the Status of Education Personnel adopted by Member States (UNESCO and ILO) in
1996.
More
recently, during the year 2002, the University of Tampere and the Open
University of Catalunya (UOC) obtained from UNESCO the right to create two
UNESCO Chairs on e-learning. These chairs started to
work in fields such as educational innovations, knowledge management, and
multimedia instruction design. The
fields will be covered through research activities, exchanges among
institutions and researchers, professors and students, graduate programmes and
extension services.
Both
Chairs, which decided to implement joint activities, will be the focal point of
networks dealing with the utilization of new technologies for education. It is expected that the chair in
Tampere will play an important function in the consolidation of GUS, the Global
University System.
During
the evaluation exercise of the UNITWIN Programme (Internal Evaluation of the
UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme, D. Chitoran, July 1996), it was observed that
successful projects always fulfil certain conditions, such as:
As
the UNITWIN Programme is based on solidarity and participation, the projects in
which all institutions actively participate in its conception and
implementation are assured of success.
In
addition, two more elements should be considered:
a)
The 1999 UNDP Human Development Report showed clearly that imbalances in
the field of new technologies can, in the short term, lead to a wider gap
between rich and poor countries and a higher degree of exclusion among and
inside countries. According to UNDP, "South Asia, home to 23% of the world's people, has less than 1% of Internet users. To purchase a
computer would cost the average Bangladeshi more than eight years' income, the
average American, just one month's wage.
English prevails in almost 80% of all websites, yet less than one in 10
people worldwide speak it. In
South Africa, the best-connected African country, many hospitals and about 75%
of schools have no telephone line.
Even at the university level, where there is connection, up to 1,000
people can depend on just one terminal.
A single computer is not enough: an entire telecommunications infrastructure is needed." As a consequence of these imbalances, UNDP states, "this exclusivity is creating parallel worlds. Those with
income, education and - literally - connections have cheap and instantaneous
access to information. The rest are left with uncertain, slow and costly access."
Under these circumstances, we can add that any initiative in this field should have as a priority - when fixing objectives - the reduction of these gaps and positive measures need to be taken to democratise access to the New Information and Communication Technologies, in particular to Internet.
b)
In present times, as mentioned above, there is a tendency towards the
commercialisation of higher education that in many countries has become a big
business, including through the utilization of Internet. Full packages of courses, which
frequently do not take into consideration either the interests or the cultures
of receiving countries, are being disseminated (in fact, they are being sold)
all over the world. This is the
reason why the participants in the WCHE clearly expressed their disapproval of
any kind of monopoly in the deliverance of contents through new
technologies. This is what is behind declarations such as "Quality in higher education is a multidimensional concept" and "Due attention should be paid to specific institutional, national and regional contexts in order to take into account diversity and to avoid uniformity."
The
demonstrations on telemedicine presented by the organizers of the Tampere
Conference in 1999, prior to the official activities of this conference,
revealed the enormous potential that the digital revolution can provide for the
benefit of humanity. But, as one
of the participants mentioned, the problem for the majority of the population
is poverty, and all the people and institutions dealing with the development of
these technologies must consider it.
Federico Mayor, the Director General of UNESCO, who supported this conference and its objectives, stated that "in the world today, the revolutionary changes brought about by technological developments and the emergence of new information infrastructure cannot be ignored."
But, he added, "technologies are not ends in themselves, they are used to extend opportunities of learning to news groups, to make learning more efficient and flexible, and to enrich the learning processes."
Since
the World Conference on Higher Education took place in 1998, the issue of the
utilization of the new technology is present everywhere and I am convinced
that, when talking about the objectives and institutionalisation of the Global
University System, I can only offer the following advice:
1) It is urgent (and this
indeed seems to be the intention) to mobilise all stakeholders linked to this
subject and, in particular, the institutions of higher education of all
continents. The elaboration of a
feasibility project for analysing the status of the use of NICT in the world
and defining an action based on social needs and respecting the diversity of
cultures is essential.
2) The conclusion of the Human Development Report of UNDP should be used as a guide for this action; especially the part on the risk of marginalisation, where it indicates that there "does not have to be a reason for despair." It should be a call to action for:
a) more connectivity: setting up
telecommunications and computer hardware;
b) more community: focusing on group
access, not just individual ownership;
c) more capacity: building human
skills for the knowledge society;
d) more content: putting local views,
news, culture and commerce on the Web;
e) more creativity: adapting
technology to local needs and opportunities;
f) more collaboration: developing
Internet governance to accommodate diverse national needs;
g) more cash: finding innovative ways
to fund the knowledge society;
3)
A positive
agenda should be adopted, as suggested by the Secretary General of UNCTAD, for
establishing a network system in which higher education institutions play the
most important role in disseminating the use of new technologies for the
development of all societies, principles that were adopted by the World
Conference on Higher Education.
Summary of
the World Declaration on Higher Education 1.
Higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis
of merit, in keeping with Article 26.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. As a consequence, no
discrimination can be accepted in granting access to higher education on grounds
of race, gender, language, religion or economic, cultural or social
distinctions, or physical disabilities. 2.
The core missions of higher education systems (to educate, to train,
to undertake research and, in particular, to contribute to the sustainable
development and improvement of society as a whole) should be preserved,
reinforced and further expanded, namely to educate highly qualified
graduates and responsible citizens and to provide opportunities (espaces
ouverts)
for higher learning and for learning throughout life. Moreover, higher education has
acquired an unprecedented role in present-day society, as a vital component
of cultural, social, economic and political development and as a pillar of
endogenous capacity building, the consolidation of human rights, sustainable
development, democracy and peace, in a context of justice. It is the duty of higher education to
ensure that the values and ideals of a culture of peace prevail. 3.
Higher education institutions and their personnel and students should
preserve and develop their crucial functions, through the exercise of ethics
and scientific and intellectual rigour in their various activities. They should also enhance their critical
and forward-looking function, through the ongoing analysis of emerging social, economic,
cultural and political trends, providing a focus for forecasting, warning and
prevention. For this, they
should enjoy full academic autonomy and freedom, while being fully
responsible and accountable to society. 4.
Relevance in higher education should be assessed in terms of the
fit between what society expects of institutions and what they do. For this, institutions and systems,
in particular in their reinforced relations with the world of work, should base
their long-term orientations on societal aims and needs, including the
respect of cultures and environment protection. Developing entrepreneurial skills and initiatives should
become major concerns of higher education. Special attention should be paid to higher education's
role of service to society, especially activities aimed at eliminating
poverty, intolerance, violence, illiteracy, hunger, environmental degradation
and disease, and to activities aiming at the development of peace, through an
interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary approach. 5.
Higher education is part of a seamless system, starting with early
childhood and primary education and continuing through life. The contribution of higher education
to the development of the whole education system and the reordering of its
links with all levels of education, in particular with secondary education,
should be a priority. Secondary education
should both prepare for and facilitate access to higher education as well as
offer broad training and prepare students for active life. 6.
Diversifying higher education models and recruitment methods and
criteria is essential both to meet demand and to give students the rigorous
background and training required by the twenty-first century. Learners must have an optimal range
of choice and the acquisition of knowledge and know-how should be viewed in a
lifelong perspective, based on flexible entry and exit points within the
system. 7.
Quality in higher education is a multidimensional concept, which should embrace
all its functions and activities: teaching and academic programmes, research
and scholarship, staffing, students, infrastructure and the academic
environment. Particular
attention should be paid to the advancement of knowledge through
research. Higher education
institutions in all regions should be committed to transparent internal
and external evaluation, conducted openly by independent specialists. However, due attention should be paid
to specific institutional, national and regional contexts in order to take
into account diversity and to avoid uniformity. There is a perceived need for a new vision and paradigm of higher
education, which should be student-oriented. To achieve this goal, curricula need to be recast so as to
go beyond simple cognitive mastery of disciplines and include the acquisition
of skills, competencies and abilities for communication, creative and
critical analysis, independent thinking and team work in multicultural
contexts. 8.
A vigorous policy of staff development is an essential element for
higher education institutions.
Clear policies should be established concerning higher education teachers, so as to update and
improve their skills, with stimulus for constant innovation in curriculum,
teaching and learning methods, and with an appropriate professional and
financial status, and for excellence in research and teaching, reflecting the
corresponding provisions of the Recommendation concerning the Status of
Higher-Education Teaching Personnel approved by the General Conference of
UNESCO in November 1997. 9.
National and institutional decision-makers should place students and their needs at
the centre of their concerns and should consider them as major partners and
responsible stakeholders in the renewal of higher education. Guidance and counselling services should
be developed, in co-operation with student organisations, to take account of
the needs of ever more diversified categories of learners. Students who do drop out should have
suitable opportunities to return to higher education if and when appropriate. Institutions should educate students
to become well-informed and deeply motivated citizens, who can think
critically, analyse problems of society, look for solutions to the problems
of society, apply them and accept social responsibilities. 10.
Measures must be taken or reinforced to ensure the participation of
women in higher education, in particular at the decision-making level and in
all disciplines in which they are under-represented. Further efforts are required to
eliminate all gender stereotyping in higher education. To overcome obstacles and to enhance
the access of women to higher education remains an urgent priority in the
renewal process of systems and institutions. 11.
The potential of new information and communication technologies for the renewal of
higher education by extending and diversifying delivery, and by making
knowledge and information available to a wider public should be fully
utilised. Equitable access to
these should be assured through international co-operation and support to
countries that lack capacities to acquire such tools. Adapting these technologies to
national, regional and local needs and securing technical, educational,
management and institutional systems to sustain them should be a priority. 12.
Higher education should be considered as a public service. While diversified sources of
funding, both private and public, are necessary, public support for higher
education and research remains essential to ensure a balanced achievement
of its educational and social missions.
Management and financing in higher education should be instruments to
improve quality and relevance.
This requires the development of appropriate planning and
policy-analysis capacities and strategies based on partnerships between higher
education institutions and responsible state authorities. Autonomy to manage internal affairs
is necessary, but with clear and transparent accountability to society. 13.
The international dimension of higher education is an
inherent part of its quality. Networking, which has emerged as
a major means of action, should be based on sharing, solidarity and equality among partners. The "brain drain" has yet
to be stemmed, since it continues to deprive the developing countries and
those in transition, of the high-level expertise necessary to accelerate
their socio-economic progress.
Priority should be given to training programmes in the developing
countries, in centres of excellence forming regional and international
networks, with short periods of specialised and intensive study abroad. 14.
Regional and international normative instruments for the recognition
of studies and diplomas should be ratified and implemented, including
certification of skills, competencies and abilities of graduates, making it
easier for students to change courses, in order to facilitate mobility within
and between national systems. 15.
Close partnership amongst all stakeholders - national and institutional policy-makers, governments and parliaments, the media, teaching and related staff, researchers, students and their families, the world of work, community groups - is required in order to set in train a movement for the in-depth reform and renewal of higher education. |
|
Bourges, Hervé
(1999). L'UNESCO et les pendules
d'Internet. Le Monde,
Paris, 30 July.
Carnoy, Martin (2000), Sustaining the new economy - work, family and community in the information age, Russel Sage Foundation, New York, Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Chitoran, D.
(1996). Internal Evaluation of the
UNITWIN/UNESCO chairs programme.
Paris: UNESCO.
CRUE, Conferencia de Rectores de las Universidades Espa-olas (2002), Lecciones de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Educacin Superior - Perspectivas de la Educacin Superior en el Siglo XXI (CRUE e Fondacin Universitria para la Cooperacin Internacional) - Madrid 2002.
Dias, M.A.R. (1992). Improving co-operation to ameliorate quality and relevance
in higher education. Paris: OECD. Journal Education Development, 12,
2, 123-129.
Dias, M.A.R. (1999). International inter-university cooperation - XII Santander
Group General Assembly, Las Palmas.
Le Monde (1995), Supplément du journal Le Monde, Paris, France, 17 mai, Cahier nº 3- Les métamorphoses du travail.
Le Monde Diplomatique (1999).
Manière de voir 46, Révolution dans la communication. July/August, Paris.
Le Monde (2002). supplément
Emploi, 1er. Ocotobre, Le télétravail cherche une seconde chance.
Le Monde (2002). Supplément
Campus19 Novembre, Le temps des doutes.
Le Monde
Diplomatique (2002). Manière de
voir 66, Novembre/Décembre, Le défi social.
Mayor, Federico
(1999). Greetings presented at the
opening session of the "Emerging Global Electronic Distance Learning
Conference", Tampere, Finland, 9 August.
.
Nayyar, Deepak (Ed.) (2002). Governing globalisation: issues and
institutions, A
study prepared for the World Institute for development economics research of
the United Nations University.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
OCDE (1998). Redéfinir l'enseignement tertiaire (English version: Redefining tertiary education).
OIT, Organização Internacional do Trabalho (2000). Rapport sur l'emploi dans le monde 1998-1999 - http://www.ilo.org
OIT, Organização
Internacional do Trabalho (2002).
Conférence Internationale du Travail- 91e. session, Rapport IV - Apprendre et se former pour travailler dans la société du savoir, Genebra, Suisse, ISBN 92-2-212876-1 ISSN 0251-3218
(primeira edição).
Orbicom Network
of UNESCO Chairs in Communication (Therèse Paquet-Sévigny) (1995). Activity Repport, Nov.
Poisson, M. (1998). Education and globalisation. IIEP Newsletter. XVI, No. 2. April-June.
Paris: UNESCO.
Ricupero, Rubens
(2001). Rebuilding confidence in the multilateral trading system: closing the 'legitmacy gap.' In Gary P. Sampson (Ed.) The role of
the World Trade Organization in Global Governance (pp. 37 a
58). Tokyo: UNU Press.
Rubio Royo, Enrique
(1999). Universidad de Las Palmas
de Gran Canaria, Tecnologias de la Información, Cátedra UNITWIN-UNESCO de
Tecnologías de la Información para la Región Noroccidental de Africa- XII
Santander Group General Assembly, Las Palmas, April.
Sampson, Gary (Ed.)
(2001). The role of the World
Trade Organization in global governance. Tokyo:
UNU Press.
Sciences Humaines
(2001). nº320- mars/avril/mai,
Hors série- La société du savoir.
Tuomioja, Erkki (2001) - Globalisation - Threats and Opportunities- Address at the University for Peace in Costa Rica on 28 November.
UNDP (1999). World Human Report, New York.
UNESCO (1992), The Unitwin/UNESCO Chairs Programme - brochure, Paris.
UNESCO
(1995). Division of Higher
Education, Policy Paper for Change and Development in Higher Education, Paris.
UNESCO
(1997). Open and Distance Learning
- Prospects and Policy Considerations, Paris.
UNESCO
(1998). World Declaration on
Higher Education for the XXIst Century and Framework for Priority Action for Change and Development of
Higher Education, Paris, 5/9 October.
UNESCO
(1998). World Conference on Higher
Education, Directory. UNITWIN/UNESCO
Chairs, Paris, October.
Van Ginkel, Hans (2001). Dialogue of Civilizations: Finding common approaches to promoting peace and human development. Tokyo: United Nations University.
Author
Biographical Sketch
Marco Antonio Rodrigues Dias T.C.D. (Third Cycle Diploma) Vice President for Administration Global University System 36, Rue Ernest Renan 92.190 Meudon France Tel: +33-1-45 34 3509 +33-1-45-68-3009 (UNU office in Paris) Fax: +33-1-45 34 3509 E-mail: mardias@wanadoo.fr |
|
Special Assistant of the Rector of United Nations University - Director, Division of Higher Education, UNESCO, from October 1981 to February 1999. General Coordinator of the
UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs programme, from 1991 to 1999. Represented the Director-General on the Council of the
United Nations University in Tokyo.
He was the Executive Secretary of the Steering Committee for the World
Conference on Higher Education (October 1998) and its main organizer. He studied philosophy and law and has a
postgraduate diploma in communication from the University of Paris (Third Cycle
-1968). A former journalist, he
was lecturer, departmental head, Dean of extension studies and Vice-President
at the University of Brasilia in the 1970s. He is the author of several books on communication, higher
education and politics published in Portuguese, French, Spanish and
English. Among them: O Fato e a versão do fato-Um
jornalista nos anos sessenta [Facts and
interpretation of the facts - a journalist in the 1960s] (1993) and
Perspectivas de la Educación Superior en el Siglo XXI (Prospects for Higher
Education in the XXI Century (2002).
He was granted the "Légion d'honneur" decoration by the French Government in 1999.