This study presents a comparative analysis of the devolution of education governance between Makueni County in Kenya and Ontario, Canada, focusing on governance structures, funding mechanisms, and educational outcomes. The paper analyzes the various challenges and opportunities posed by decentralization in both regions, with a focus on differences in administrative resources, the distribution of central funds, and local government performance; Others are more systemic within the childhood education environment, for example Makueni County is still quite a long way behind Ontario in terms of fully (for the most part) functioning decentralized education systems, check out the comparative in terms of sustainable or reliable governance models, funding mechanisms and local autonomy, the other perhaps is regional segregation as certainly Makueni County has some overarching larger issues beyond just early childhood development e.g. the funding issues and deployment issues of teachers, but these perhaps can be attributed to the ongoing issues with devolution within Kenya and indeed with human capital in this region more broadly. Employing a mixed-methods research design including policy analysis, interviews and analysis of secondary data, the study examines the impact of devolution on educational outcomes. Results suggest that Makueni promotes more local participation but faces challenges with institutional functionality and fair financing, contrary to the Model of Ontario, which shows a much higher levels of efficiently, equity and accountability. The paper then ends with policy recommendations for Makueni, and suggesting to implement ones from Ontario´s decentralized system that could be a solution for Makueni missing in governance, financial, and education standards.
This paper examines the potential transformation of Venezuela into a significant IT offshore hub in the context of anticipated political regime change. Using a multi-dimensional analytical framework that integrates labor economics, financial technology adoption, enterprise software markets, and critical infrastructure security, we investigate how Venezuela's prolonged isolation has paradoxically produced unique conditions for technology sector growth. We identify four critical impact vectors shaping this potential transition: Remote labor arbitrage normalization â Venezuela's highly educated yet underemployed workforce, coupled with global remote work trends, creates a compelling labor cost advantage in international IT services markets. Cryptocurrency-native population as a fintech catalyst â Years of hyperinflation and sanctions have driven widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies and stablecoins as alternative financial infrastructure, positioning Venezuelans to lead in fintech innovation and digital payments integration. Technology infrastructure deficit as a SaaS expansion opportunity â Although national telecommunications and digital infrastructure lag regional peers, planned post-transition investment in fiber optics, 5G, and connectivity could accelerate Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) consumption and development. Cybersecurity challenges in legacy system modernization â Legacy systems and weak institutional cybersecurity create both risks and service demand, underscoring the need for secure IT modernization strategies in public and private sectors alike. We argue that Venezuela's forced technological experimentation during economic collapse â including informal digital payment systems and decentralized finance adoption â has unintentionally cultivated technological resilience and local digital proficiency unprecedented in Latin America. By situating Venezuela's tech transition within broader geopolitical disruption and global technology labor markets, this research contributes new frameworks for analyzing emerging offshore IT markets in post-crisis economies and highlights actionable pathways for stakeholders targeting digital services growth in transitional states.
On May 26, 2010, Canadaâs Minister of Finance tabled in the House of Commons a draft Securities Act. The purpose of the Act is to establish Federal government jurisdiction over securities legislation and create a Federal Securities Regulatory Authority. With this initiative, the Federal government proposes to centralize the regulatory apparatus to ensure uniformity of policies and regulations across Canada and meet international standards of quality and comprehensiveness. But this initiative also raises significant constitutional and economic policy issues. In a comprehensive paper examining the main arguments supporting a centralized securities apparatus, Pierre Lortie, Senior Business Advisor at Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP, argues that sound public policy should move ahead only if there is a strong body of empirical evidence demonstrating that the performance of the current regime is significantly inferior to that of other countries â particularly the United States â and that a centralization of the regulatory apparatus is necessary to correct the situation. The paper demonstrates that Canadaâs decentralized securities regulatory regime has in fact shown flexibility, a great capacity to adapt to changing circumstances and an unrelenting ability to respond to particular industry or regional needs. It has also provided strong assurances against the hasty adoption of disruptive and costly regulations because it is less susceptible to the imposition of politically expedient or faddish requirements or the influence of a dominant industry or interest groups. In contrast, a centralized system runs the risk of turning into a disruptive, costly and regrettable initiative that will not give Canadians what they expect, while erasing many of the benefits achieved so far.
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) funds community-based organizations to provide services such as official language training, job placement, and community engagement in a decentralized model of immigrant service provision. This approach to settlement services has been simultaneously praised as a model of best practice and criticized for inefficiency. Partly in response to criticism, in 2008 IRCC implemented the Modernized Approach to Settlement Services, a management strategy that maintains the departmentâs decentralized approach to funding settlement service provision but introduces several important changes. First, the Modernized Approach consolidates settlement services into a single Settlement Program to streamline the application process. Second, the Modernized Approach focuses on project outcomes rather than just measuring inputs and outputs. And third, the Modernized Approach creates avenues for grass-roots organizations to have a voice in the governance of the Settlement Program. While a few studies have discussed the Modernized Approach to Settlement Services as a promising way forward, this is the first article to examine its impact empirically. Using key informant perspectives as a guide, this article provides an overview of the areas and extent to which it has created improvements over IRCCâs previous approach to settlement services, and it identifies areas for potential improvements.
Resume: Immigration, Refugies et Citoyennete Canada (IRCC) finance des organisations communautaires pour fournir des services tels que la formation linguistique, acces a lâemploi, et lâengagement communautaire dans un modele decentralise de la fourniture de services aux immigrants. Cette approche a ete simultanement salue comme un modele de bonnes pratiques et critique pour son inefficacite. En partie en reponse a la critique, en 2008 IRCC mis en Ĺuvre lâapproche modernisee de services dâetablissement, une strategie de gestion qui maintient lâapproche decentralisee du ministere pour la prestation de services dâetablissement, mais qui introduit plusieurs changements importants. Tout dâabord, lâapproche modernisee consolide les services dâetablissement dans un programme de reglement unique pour simplifier le processus de demande. Deuxiemement, lâapproche modernisee met lâaccent sur les resultats des projets plutot que des entrees et sorties juste mesure. Et troisiemement, lâapproche modernisee cree des avenues pour les organisations de base dâavoir une voix dans la gouvernance du Programme dâEtablissement. Bien que quelques etudes ont discute de lâapproche modernisee de services dâetablissement comme une voie prometteuse. Ceci est le premier article dâexaminer son impact empiriquement. Utilisation de perspectives des informateurs cles comme un guide, cet article donne un apercu des domaines et dans quelle mesure il a cree des ameliorations par rapport approche precedente IRCC aux services dâetablissement, et il identifie les domaines dâamelioration potentiels.
This book addresses a variety of issues \n relating to intergovernmental finance and the provision and \n financing of local services including budgeting and \n financial management, the institutional framework for the \n conduct of intergovernmental relations, appropriate methods \n of service delivery in metropolitan agglomerations and \n remote rural areas, local government enterprises, user \n charges, property taxes, income and value-added taxes, \n natural resource taxes, and local business taxes. \n Throughout, the authors draw on experience both in Canada \n and in other decentralized countries and consider to varying \n extents the special problems facing Russia and other large \n transitional economies.
Decentralization looms large in any analysis of Canadian economic and social policy. This trend has been especially pronounced in the area of unemployment insurance (UI) and social assistance (SA) programmes. Provinces now manage SA programmes and retain 100% of any cost savings that they achieve, while the Federal government maintains full responsibility for the passive component of UI. Under a series of provincial-federal Labour Market Development Agreements, since 1997 most of Canada's provinces have taken over administrative responsibility for the employment benefit and support measures (EBSMs) targeted on UI beneficiaries. A number of articles have examined the implications for provincial SA systems of restrictive measures in the UI programme. This paper examines the possibility that provinces may shift actual and potential SA clients onto the insurance system (now called employment insurance, EI). It concludes that within the context of EBSMs, any cost-shifting of this ...
Education reform is a long-term project, Mr. Levin and Mr. Wiens argue, and the Manitoba Education Agenda for Student Success will not meet the immediate political need to demonstrate bold action. However, by focusing on teaching and learning, respecting all participants, building capacity, and making use of research, it just might achieve the goals we want for all our children. FOR THE LAST 20 years, governments across North America and around the world have been concerned with improving the outcomes of schooling. The pressure to make changes in schools is fueled by national and international test comparisons and driven by the belief that economic competitiveness rests increasingly on people's skills and knowledge. The specifics of education reform vary from setting to setting, shaped by particularities of history, culture, political structures, demography, and other factors. Nonetheless, some common elements are evident across the English-speaking industrialized countries.1 The main strategies have included: * greater specification of curriculum standards and outcomes, with more focus on reading, writing, mathematics, science, and technology; * more assessment of student outcomes and public reporting of the results on a school-by-school basis; * greater opportunity for parents and students to choose the school the student attends; * more pressure on teachers through measures that control their work, limit their pay, test their competence, and so on; * altered finance structures to reward schools that are able to increase academic results or attract more students or both; and * within these policy frames, greater decentralization of managerial responsibility to individual schools. Kappan readers will be familiar with many examples. In the U.S., reforms in Chicago, Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, and California have been the subject of much discussion, but every state has had some kind of major reform program, and some states have had several different reform programs over the last 10 years. Countries such as England and New Zealand as well as some of the Australian states have gone through some dramatic changes. In Canada, reforms have been particularly extensive in provinces such as Ontario and Alberta. All this reform has produced a great deal of upheaval and much controversy. Many speeches have been made, much improvement has been promised, lots of money has been spent, and many educators have felt disheartened. The results in terms of increased student achievement have been generally disappointing. In reviewing five large-scale change efforts, Ken Leithwood, Doris Jantzi, and Blair Mascall concluded: Most large-scale reforms have not produced gains [in student achievement], however. . . . Furthermore, where data were available on other types of student-related outcomes across the five cases, results were negative. None of the . . . cases of large-scale reform demonstrated evidence of increasing graduation rates, college attendance, or student retention.2 Why have the results of so many reforms been so disappointing? The answer is no great mystery. Reforms have not worked because they have not focused on the things that we know can affect student performance in schools.3 To put it bluntly, improved student outcomes result from appropriate changes in classroom and school practices that are widely accepted and implemented by teachers, seen as meaningful by students, and supported by parents and communities. We have in recent years been learning more and more about each of the elements of this definition. There is growing - though far from complete - agreement on approaches to teaching that are more and less effective. In areas such as reading, writing, mathematics, science, and citizenship we have increasing evidence on the kinds of instructional practices that are most likely to improve students' skills and commitment. âŚ
People in the United States have generally ignored Canada's long experience with extensive public financing and management of its health system. This is unfortunate because the two countries are similar in so many ways that Canada's experience is very pertinent to the continuing debate in the United States over increasing government involvement in health care. Two lessons emerge from Canada's experience. First, while many in the United States are dubious about more government involvement in health care, Canada's overall experience has been favorable. Second, Canada's experience suggests some specific forms that such public involvement should take to improve the performance of the health system. One important reason for Canada's favorable experience has been the decentralization of government decision-making. Constitutionally, the ten provinces have jurisdiction over most health services, so they are key decision-makers. The federal government, however, has had an important role in the shaping of Canada's health system, most importantly by offering subsidies to provinces willing to establish certain health programs that meet its standards. Canada's extensive public financing of health services is the most striking difference between its health system and that of the United States. In each province all medically necessary physician services and most inpatient and outpatient hospital services are publicly financed for all residents. Hospital services have been publicly financed for more than twenty years and physician services for more than ten years. Provincial agencies administer the programs, reimbursing physicians predominantly on a fee-for-service basis. Hospitals typically receive biweekly payments based on their provincially approved budgets. The provincial plans are financed jointly by the federal and provincial governments, largely from their general revenues. Few now bother to collect premiums or special health taxes, and minimal use is made of deterrent charges. The provinces vary considerably in the extent to which other personal health services are publicly financed. For example, some finance dental services for children; some, prescription drugs for people aged sixty-five years and over.