# **Box 3: Trends in Public Education Spending in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Countries**

Fragility, conflict, and violence can have a profoundly negative impact on a country’s education system and its ability to provide a quality education to all children. A lack of funding often exacerbates the difficulties faced by the governments of these countries (Commins 2017; UNESCO 2011).

On the face of it, countries on the World Bank’s Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations (FCS) list seem to devote similar shares of GDP to public education spending as other low-income and lower-middle-income countries, and to spend the money in similar ways. The figure below compares the public education spending aggregates for these three categories of countries. The data show that patterns and trends in public education spending for FCS countries are similar to those for other countries at a similar stage of development.

<!-- Start of picture text --> Public Education Spending in FCS Countries is Similar to Funding in Other Low-income and<br>Lower-middle-income Countries<br>a. Public education spending b. Public education spending by education level,<br>(% GDP) 2014 – 17 (%)<br>5<br>24% 20% 17%<br>4<br>3 27% 29% 42%<br>2<br>50% 51%<br>1 42%<br>0<br>2006–09 2010–13 2014–17 LIC FCS LMIC<br>LIC FCS LMIC Primary Secondary Tertiary<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source:_ World Bank calculations using UIS and IMF online databases.

_Note:_ World Bank income group classifications in 2017 are used to group countries and are as follows: LIC = low-income country, and LMIC = lower-middle-income country. FCS = country classified as a fragile and conflict-affected situation.

The lack of data on financing in fragile and conflict-affected countries and the need to go beyond national aggregates to understand spending inequalities make it difficult to draw any firm conclusions on public spending on education in these countries. Fifty-five countries have appeared on the Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations list since its introduction in 2006. Data on public education spending as a percentage of GDP are only available for approximately half of these countries at any one time. It is possible the countries that fail to report are those in which systems have broken down and, as a result, they spend less on education. Even when FCS countries have managed to report spending data, weaknesses in their public financial management systems make it more likely that the funds are not distributed fairly and are not used for their intended purposes.

# **_Education’s Share of Government Budgets Has Remained Relatively Stable over the Last 20 Years_**

Governments must make difficult trade-offs when deciding how to allocate public funds to support a variety of priorities and policy objectives. Channeling more resources into education inevitably means channeling less into other sectors and it can be difficult for governments to take such action. In some cases, increased peace and stability–and corresponding declines in military spending–have allowed governments to devote a greater share of public spending to education. During its war with Eritrea, Ethiopia spent nearly one-third of the government budget on military expenditures, but this figure began to decline as the conflict wound 10