The purpose of any education system is to equip learners with the ability to live a fulfilling and productive life. Currently, East Asia is home to seven of the top ten education systems in the world. Despite impressive achievements, these above-average performing systems are not resting on their accomplishments—they continue to deepen the quality of education, tying learning to new and emerging needs. Central to the region’s curriculum reform is a focus on teaching and measuring 21st century skills.
Challenges with decentralization
Seventeen years ago, Indonesia embarked on its so-called big bang decentralization. Almost overnight, responsibility to deliver many public services was transferred to local governments. This was done, in part, with the hope that the decentralization would make local government more agile and responsive to issues facing local communities. However, results have yet to materialize in many locations.
In my view, a key factor driving poor results is the central government’s approach to regulating local governments. In a decentralized environment, the central government has a legitimate role as a regulator to standardize service delivery or financial management procedures. However, in practice, they have been more focused on controlling inputs and processes, with little attention to accountability for results. This approach results in the proliferation of regulatory constraints and a fearful bureaucracy that make it difficult for local leaders to respond to citizen’s problems.
Imagine that you live near one of 127 active volcanoes in Indonesia, threatened by the next eruption that could endanger your family. Imagine that your house stands in one of the most seismically-active zones in the world, or that your family lives in one of the 317 districts with high risks of flooding. This is a reality that at least 110 million Indonesians already face, and more could be affected due to the impacts of urbanization, climate change and land subsidence.
The country is known as having a ‘supermarket’ of disaster hazards. Over the past twenty years alone, the Indonesian government recorded over 24,000 disaster events that caused 190,500 fatalities, displaced almost 37 million people, and damaged over 4.3 million houses. The combined losses of these disasters totaled almost $28 billion, or around 0.3% of national GDP annually.
It is an unfortunate but fact of life that Indonesia often deals with the impacts of natural disasters. It was sadly evident again this week when I arrived in Jakarta to the unfolding disaster caused by the earthquake in Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara. My condolences go out to the families and friends of those who lost their lives.
While scientists are reluctant to say a specific natural disaster is caused by climate change, they say a changing climate is resulting in more extreme events around the world. That’s why at International Finance Corporation (IFC), the largest global organization working with the private sector in emerging markets, finding new avenues for climate financing is a key priority.
Green bonds offer a pathway. The world is witnessing a rapid growth in green bonds, dramatically increasing the flow of capital to green projects and bringing new financiers into the climate smart investment space.
While disasters threaten the well-being of people from all walks of life, few are as disproportionately affected as the over one billion people around the world who live with disabilities. Following the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, for example, the fatality rate for persons with disabilities was up to four times higher than that of the general population.
Persons with disabilities are especially vulnerable when disaster strikes not only due to aspects of their disabilities, but also because they are more likely, on average, to experience adverse socioeconomic outcomes than persons without disabilities, including higher poverty rates. Disasters and poorly planned disaster response and recovery efforts can exacerbate these disparities, leaving persons with disabilities struggling to cope even more both during and after the emergency.
In advance of the Global Disability Summit, and drawing on a recent report titled “Disability Inclusion in Disaster Risk Management” from the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and the Recovery (GFDRR) and the World Bank, here are five actions that development institutions, governments, and other key stakeholders can take to ensure that persons with disabilities are not left behind in the aftermath of a disaster.
Central government spending on transport increased by threefold between 2010-2016. This has enabled the country to extend its transport network capacity and improve access to some of the most remote areas across the archipelago.
The country has a road network of about 538,000 km, of which about 47,000 km are national roads, and 1,000 km are expressways. Heavy congestion and low traffic speeds translate into excessively long journey times. In fact, traveling a mere 100 km can take 2.5 to 4 hours. The country relies heavily on waterborne transport and has about 1,500 ports, with most facilities approaching their capacity limits, especially in Eastern Indonesia. Connectivity between ports and land infrastructure is limited or non-existent. The rail network is limited (6,500 km across the islands of Java and Sumatra) and poorly maintained. The country’s 39 international and 191 domestic airports mainly provide passenger services, and many are also reaching their capacity limits.
- sustainable development goals
- transport infrastructure
- freight transport
- Air pollution
- urban planning
- non-motorized transport
- Energy Efficiency
- low-emission transport
- low-carbon mobility
- low-carbon transport
- green transport
- urban transport
- mass transit
- public transport
- air transport
- maritime transport
- waterborne transport
- road transport
- roads and highways
- transport planning
- transport policy
- sustainable transport
- sustainable mobility
- Sustainable Communities
- Public Sector and Governance
- Private Sector Development
- Climate Change
- Urban Development
- East Asia and Pacific
Bapak Kris manages a pellet production factory, located just outside Boyolali City in Central Java. Since its founding, he has started considering the domestic market- despite the fact that the produced pellets have mainly been for export- as the global markets have begun to cool down. When Bapak Kris learned that the Indonesia Clean Stove Initiative (CSI) had launched its Results-Based Financing (RBF) pilot in the Province, he registered and participated in the pilot.
He combined his knowledge of the local pellet market with the pilot program incentives to expand his distribution network and test new pellet-based clean stoves. With each stove sold, the company provided the consumer 1 kg of wood pellets free of charge. With the experience of participating in the RBF pilot, Pak Kris sees the potential of the clean cooking market. He plans to continue selling clean stoves and hopes to set up his own pellet factory.
One of the encouraging signs that I pick up whenever I travel is the difference that technology is making to the lives of millions of marginalized people. In most cases it’s happening on a small, non-flashy scale in hundreds of different ways, quietly improving the opportunities that that have been denied to remote communities, women and young people for getting a foot on the ladder.
And because it is discreet and under the radar I dare as an optimist to suggest that we are at the beginning of something big – a slow tsunami of success. Let me give you some reasons why I believe this.
Small-scale entrepreneurship is widespread in developing countries, yet very few of these entrepreneurs are successful in growing their businesses beyond initial levels. Many constraints play a role, including financial, technical, and informational barriers. Yet, even when these barriers are lifted in experimental studies, we do not see the type of growth one would expect if these constraints were truly binding. In addition, many of the interventions studied, especially those targeting managerial and informational barriers, often suffer from low program take-up.