Rob Vos (Institute of Social Studies, The Hague) Arjun Bedi (Institute of Social Studies, The Hague) Paul K. Kimalu (Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis) Damiano K. Manda (Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis) Nancy N. Nafula (Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis) Mwangi S. Kimenyi (University of Connecticut)
Additional information is available for the following
registered author(s):
Kenya has experienced a rapid expansion of the education system partly due to high government expenditure on education. Despite the high level of expenditure on education, primary school enrolment has been declining since early 1990s and until 2003 when gross primary school enrolment increased to 104 percent after the introduction of free primary education. However, with an estimated net primary school enrolment rate of 77 percent, the country is far from achieving universal primary education. The worrying scenario is that the allocations of resources within the education sector seems to be ineffective as the increasing expenditure on education goes to recurrent expenditure (to pay teachers salaries). Kenya's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and the Economic Recovery Strategy for wealth and Employment Creation (ERS) outlines education targets of reaching universal primary education by 2015. The Government is faced with budget constrains and therefore the available resources need to be allocated efficiently in order to realize the education targets. The paper uses Budget Negotiation Framework (BNF) to analyze the cost effective ways of resource allocation in the primary education sector to achieve universal primary education and other education targets. Budget Negotiation Framework is a tool that aims at achieving equity and efficiency in resource allocation. Results from the analysis shows that universal primary education by the year 2015 is a feasible target for Kenya. The results also show that with a more cost- effective spending of education resources - increased trained teachers, enhanced textbook supplies and subsidies targeting the poor - the country could realize higher enrolment rates than what has been achieved with free primary education.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Connecticut, Department of Economics in its series Working papers with number
2004-47.
Length: 45 pages Date of creation: Dec 2004 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2004-47
Contact details of provider: Postal: University of Connecticut 341 Mansfield Road, Unit 1063 Storrs, CT 06269-1063 Phone: (860) 486-4889 Fax: (860) 486-4463 Web page: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christian Zimmermann).
Related research
Keywords:
Other versions of this item:
Find related papers by JEL classification: I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Other Model Applications H40 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: