Accessibility Tools

Web Accessibility plugin by DJ-Extensions.com

GI-ESCR Blog series

The COVID-19 Pandemic And Its Impact On Economic, Social And Cultural Rights

Re-building resilient education systems: three lessons on the privatisation of education emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic

This blog post was first published on the website of the Global Education Monitoring Report (GEM Report). You may see the original post here.

By members of the Privatisation in Education and Human Rights Consortium

It is well-known that the disruptions to education due to COVID-19 are enormous.

In order to understand the full effects of the pandemic, members of the Privatisation Education and Human Rights Consortium, an informal network of national, regional and global organisations and individuals who collaborate to analyse and respond to the challenges posed by the rapid growth of private actors in education from a human rights perspective and propose alternatives, have collectively monitored the news related to private education in the context of COVID-19. The following key lessons have emerged. 

1. Technological companies are not solving education inequalities, they can even perpetuate them.

Education authorities around the world have quickly tried to shift to distance learning models in the aim of ensuring continuity of “learning”, with many embracing various digital solutions.  As discussed below, there are different ways to deliver on distance learning, including “high tech” (usually through IT equipment), and low- or no-tech (such as radio programmes).

According to a UNESCO estimate, 95 governments across the globe have introduced online solutions during the pandemic, and online learning is increasingly becoming an integral part of education globally. This has led to the development of a narrative suggesting online learning and technology could play a key role in resolving education challenges. Big technological companies such as Google, Microsoft and Facebook have rapidly gained an increased prominence in global education, bringing out papers such as “Education Reimagined”, suggesting a paradigm shift for education, and educational companies have started to market online schooling platforms promoting these as long-term alternatives for education.

However, online solutions in education are not working well for everyone and are causing great concerns for equality and equitable education systems. Currently, at least 500 million children are not accessing distance learning alternatives and almost 47% of all primary and secondary students being targeted exclusively by national online learning platforms do not have access to the internet. Examples are widespread: in Pakistan, only 31% per cent of homes have access to the internet; in Latin America 46% of boys and girls between the ages of 5 and 12 live in houses without access to the internet; and in Kenya only 22% of children have access. This is not just a problem in the Global South. In certain regions of Spain, up to 20% of students lack access to online materials; in the USA, approximately 1 in 10 children from low-income households has little to no access to the technology for learning.

Distance learning, in particular through “high-tech” solutions promoted by private companies, can thus be very problematic for the realisation of the right to education. In addition, relying on multinational corporations to deliver education solutions is contributing to the emergence of new forms of privatisation and commercialisation in education, that raise many other concerns, for instance about the democratic control of education.

As stressed by UN Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Dr Koumbou Boly Barry, in her report on COVID-19, “the digitization of education should never replace onsite schooling with teachers, and the massive arrival of private actors through digital technology should be considered a major danger for education systems and the rights to education for all”.

2. In many cases privatisation creates non-resilient education systems and is unsustainable.

The crisis has highlighted many cases of vulnerability arising from having an education system that relies on private actors and the resulting risks for the right to education.

It has shown private schools lacking capacity to face the crisis, for various reasons that could include dependency on fees from already low-income families, pressure to maintain profit levels, poor and short-term focused management, and lack of access to credit. Peru, Pakistan, India, the UK, and Argentina face the possibility of a mass closure of private schools. In Kenya, Morocco and Senegal, governments have had to step in to save private schools, and in Nepal and Pakistan there have been pressures from private schools to governments requesting support during the crisis. We’ve seen practices such as a rule which allowed emergency coronavirus funds to be given to private schools in the USA, which was subsequently dropped after a federal judge ruled that it violated the law.

This fragility of private schools has clearly had an effect on children suddenly out of school as well as their families. Although many families have lost their source of income, a number of private schools have continued charging fees, even when they could not continue providing services. For example, in Tunisia, parents were concerned as to how they will pay tuition fees for a third term, in the Democratic Republic of Congo private schools urged parents to pay fees, and in India private schools continued to hike fees, despite the Government guidelines.

The crisis has also exposed the lack of protection of labour rights of teachers working in private schools. Examples include private school teachers in Somalia facing uncertainty as to whether they will receive their usual salary, and private schools in Pakistan, Malawi, Senegal, Morocco, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo and Jordan as to whether they would be in a position to pay their staff, with some in India deciding to pay teachers by the hour instead of their monthly salaries. In India it also took orders from various High Courts to ensure that if private schools continued to collect tuition they would be required to prioritise payment of teachers and other staff with money brought in. Bridge International Academies (BIA) has also come under strong criticism. In Kenya, BIA staff were sent home with only 10% pay, uncertain when this would change, and in Liberia the Ministry of Labour launched an investigation into complaints that BIA had reduced staff salaries by 80-90% despite a government directive prohibiting pay cuts beyond 50%.

In other cases, governments have stepped in to support private schools specifically with the payment of staff salaries, reflecting the central role of States to ensure the sustainability of a service like education and basic labour rights. This was the case in Congo and Cote d’Ivoire, while in Togo and Mauritius teachers at private institutions have called on the government for help.  

3. The urgent solution: invest in free public education and re-build sustainable systems.

The COVID-19 crisis and its effect on education systems has once again revealed the importance of stable, well-funded, free public and inclusive education systems that meet human rights standards – and shown that this cannot be achieved without public authorities.

If there is one lesson to draw from this crisis for education, it is that it is indispensable to build human rights-aligned, non-market, spaces, with a strong public sector, that guarantee equal services for all, even in cases of contingency. Human rights norms and standards are more relevant than ever in these times, and the recently adopted Abidjan Principles provide clear guidelines to help States build more equitable, solid and effective education systems.

Perhaps most critical is to ensure that post-COVID, free public education systems are sustainably financed through action on budget shares, progressive taxation, increased aid, moratorium of debt payments and a push back against austerity policies (as articulated in the recent Call to Action on Domestic Financing of Education). They should use this funding to focus on developing sustainable, resilient, public education systems. Where governments are financing private schools or engaging with tech companies for online learning, regulatory measures should be taken to ensure the right to education and protect the most vulnerable.

As policy-makers are considering how to rebuild their economies, governments have a unique opportunity to learn from the current crisis and build solid free public education systems that will help humanity to face the challenges that arise in the coming decades.

by:

  • Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
  • Solidarité Laïque
  • Brazilian Campaign for the Right to Education
  • Initiative for Social and Economic Rights
  • Global Campaign for Education-US
  • Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ)
  • Oxfam India
  • ActionAid
  • The East African Centre for Human Rights (EACHRights)
  • Right to Education Initiative
  • Latin American Campaign for the Right to Education (CLADE)
  • The International Federation of Centers for Training in Active Education Methods (Ficeméa) 
  • Equal Education
    Members of the Privatisation in Education and Human Rights Consortium

Related Articles

Litigating for social justice with ‘one armed tied behind your back’: Why economic and social rights must be incorporated into UK law

Litigating for social justice with ‘one armed tied behind your back’: Why economic and social rights must be incorporated into UK law

GI-ESCR
BHR Symposium: Corporate Accountability, COVID-19 and the Right to Health

BHR Symposium: Corporate Accountability, COVID-19 and the Right to Health

GI-ESCR
Post-pandemic futures, hope, and human rights

Post-pandemic futures, hope, and human rights

GI-ESCR

SITEMAP

TAKE ACTION

NEWSLETTER

Don´t miss any updates!
SUBSCRIBE
Image

Social Media:

Log in

Climate and Environmental Justice

We have advanced rights-based and gender-transformative transition frameworks through research that centres the lived experiences of women and marginalised communities on the frontlines of extractive energy policies, promoting climate and energy frameworks attentive to the social and care-related impacts of transition pathways. We have developed a clear vision for a gender-just transition, firmly rooted in gender and human rights norms, establishing both the legal basis and the direction for the transformative changes our planet and societies urgently need. In particular, the ‘Guiding Principles for Gender Equality and Human Rights in the Energy Transition’, a collective effort built through online consultations, an in-person workshop and multiple rounds of revision with activists, practitioners and experts from around the world, outline a transformative vision for reshaping global energy systems through a human rights and gender equality lens.

Our work recognises that the climate emergency is both an existential threat and an opportunity to reimagine societies built on social, gender, economic and environmental justice. We ground our advocacy in feminist and intersectional principles, prioritising the agency and perspectives of communities in the Global South who have contributed the least to the climate emergency yet face its most devastating consequences. Central to our approach is the understanding that energy is not merely a commodity but a fundamental human right; essential for dignity, health, education, work and the realisation of countless other rights. We challenge approaches to the energy transition that risk replicating the harmful patterns of fossil fuel extraction and, instead, advocate for transformative policies that ensure human rights and gender equality as central to building climate-resilient societies rooted in dignity, justice and planetary well-being.

What's next?

We will continue to challenge approaches that treat energy transition as merely a technical shift, instead positioning it as an opportunity to reimagine economies and societies rooted in dignity for all, with particular attention to communities in the Global South who have contributed least to the climate emergency yet are most exposed to its worst effects.

We will connect community-level evidence and the lived experiences of those on the frontlines of extractive policies to national reform and global norm-setting, breaking down silos between human rights, gender, and climate movements, and advancing a shared vision that recognises just transitions as not only fundamental to achieving climate-resilient and sustainable societies, but as transformative pathways that advance social and gender equality, redistribute power and resources equitably, and ensure that energy systems serve the public good rather than profit.

We will mainstream rights-based and genderjust transition priorities in key multilateral spaces (particularly, within the Just Transition Work Programme and the to-be-developed Just Transition Mechanism, within the UNFCCC) to guarantee that just transitions are advanced at all levels.

We will also translate our work, through strategic advocacy, into at least two concrete policy wins, whether promoted, adopted, implemented, or scaled, in priority countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Colombia, South Africa, or Kenya), ensuring these policies align with human rights standards, centre gender equality, and reflect the needs and views of affected communities.

We will build momentum for the progressive recognition of the right to sustainable energy to shift dominant narratives away from purely extractive solutions that sideline gendered impacts, community participation, and Global South perspectives.

Economic Justice and Climate Finance

Our work has transformed the global discussion on fiscal policy in a more just, emancipatory and sustainable direction. Our approach has combined both high-level, expert contributions within decisionmaking circles, with bold, impactful work on narrative change with the general public.

We have been instrumental in the inclusion of human rights as a guiding principle of the future United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, a multilateral instrument with the potential of raising approx. USD 492 billion per year in public revenues currently foregone to global tax abuse. In the process leading to the ‘Compromiso de Sevilla’ decided at FfD4, we proposed and succeeded in creating a specific human rights workstream within the Civil Society Financing for Development Mechanism, which was critical to ensure that explicit commitments on the matter were included in the negotiating outcome. In a context of cutbacks in multilateral institutions, we have amplified the capacities of technical experts, providing rigorous technical support and leveraging our influence to ensure the enactments of groundbreaking standard-setting instruments, such as the 2025 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Statement on Fiscal Policy and Human Rights, and the first ex oficio hearing on the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights on Fiscal and Economic Policies to Address Poverty and Structural Inequality, leading to an upcoming thematic resolution on the matter. We have also bridged the silos between multilateral tax discussions and climate finance debates, promoting ambitious financing commitments to increase international and domestic resource mobilisation during COP 28, 29 and 30.

At the regional level, our engagement with fiscal cooperation platforms such as the Platform for Fiscal Cooperation of Latin America and the Caribbean (PTLAC), where we are member of its Civil Society Consultative Council, and the African Anti-IFFs Policy Tracker, for which we participated in the pilot mission in Ivory Coast together with Tax Justice Network Africa (TJNA), have been critical in cementing a growing engagement between tax administrations and ministries of finance with international legal experts, exploring actionable and transformative initiatives, such as the taxation of high-net-worth individuals, beneficial ownership registries and corporate countryby-country reports, to be implemented at the international level.

At the local level, our interventions in fiscal reform debates in Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Nigeria have contributed to shaping legislative outcomes in a more progressive, rights-compliant direction.

As for our leadership in narrative change, we have a measurable track record in delivering tailored, innovative campaigns which have decisively expanded economic justice constituencies by appealing to a broader tent. In Latin America and the Caribbean, we created the ‘Date Cuenta’ campaign, coordinating over 40 organisations across civil society to deliver plain language, innovative messaging connecting progressive fiscal reforms to the financing of health, education and social protection. ‘Date Cuenta’ generated over 55 original campaign messages that were tailored to the realities of seven priority countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Honduras) and disseminated in Spanish, Portuguese and English. In doing so, we convened more than 65 online co-creation workshops with partners, coordinating a unified communications strategy which combined digital outreach, press and media coverage, and collaboration with influencers. Ultimately, ‘Date Cuenta’ resulted in more than 60,000 interactions on social media, coverage in major regional and international media outlets, including El País, Deutsche Welle, Bloomberg and France 24, and the participation of at least 63 social media influencers through 58 dedicated publications. In collaboration with Fundación Gabo and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, we also organised a two-day workshop in Bogota with 20 journalists from 13 countries, building a regional network trained in a human rights-based approach to fiscal policy that has since generated published media coverage on outlets such as La Diaria, Ciper, El Diario Ar and Milenio. Through ‘Date Cuenta’ and our regional advocacy, we strengthened civil society engagement in key processes, including the Financing for Development track and FfD4, co-organised highlevel dialogues with states and civil society from Latin America and Africa.

What's next?

We will shape the UN Tax Convention and its Protocols so they embed human rights principles, and we will stay engaged through follow-up processes (including the expected Conference of the Parties) to support effective implementation. We will keep linking tax and climate finance so that new resources mobilised through fiscal cooperation are channelled to adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage, in line with UNFCCC commitments.

Public Services for Care Societies

We have translated participatory research into accountability and policy outcomes.

In Ivory Coast, our work with Mouvement Ivoirien des Droits Humains and affected communities since 2023 exposed how privatisation and lack of accountability restrict access to quality healthcare. It contributed to the closure of 1,022 illegal private health centres, an executive instrument strengthening the regulation of private hospitals across the country, and the creation of a permanent complaints management committee in healthcare through a bylaw issued by the prefect of Gagnoa. Partners engaged through this process also advanced concrete improvements at facility level: members of the Gagnoa Midwives Association who took part in the participatory action research pooled resources to renovate the neonatal unit of the Regional Hospital, and the Director of the Gagnoa General Hospital launched an action plan to expand services and improve patient reception, with the facility receiving the award for best hospital in the country in 2025.

In Kenya, our research with the Mathare Education Taskforce documented the absence of public schools and the expansion of private provision, evidencing impacts on households and caregivers and strengthening demands for free, quality public education. This work contributed to stronger community agency and collective organisation, alongside ongoing strategies ranging from communications to litigation to secure a public school in the area, some involving GI-ESCR and others led independently.

Across Africa, this work is complemented by a multi-country study examining the human rights implications of austerity in education and health, including how regressive fiscal policies, rising debt burdens and persistent underinvestment undermine the financing and delivery of public services.

In Latin America, from 29 November to 2 December 2021, over a thousand representatives from over one hundred countries, from grassroots movements, advocacy, human rights, and development organisations, feminist movements, trade unions, and other civil society organisations, met in Santiago, Chile, and virtually, to discuss the critical role of public services for our future. Following the meeting, the Santiago Declaration on Public Services was adopted to demand universal access to quality, gender-transformative and equitable public services as the foundation of a fair and just society.

We are currently advancing work on care systems, linking public services and fiscal justice through integrated research, advocacy and communications, including a regional campaign framing care as a collective responsibility requiring sustained public investment.

What's next?

In Ivory Coast, we will evaluate and strengthen the complaints management committee and position it as a replicable model for other health facilities. In Kenya, we will support the Mathare community to co-design a model public school for Mabatini and Ngei wards, grounded in human rights standards. Building on our multi-country austerity study, we will drive national advocacy on financing for education and health: advancing reforms in Ghana; launching a fiscal policy and public services financing agenda in Kenya through the CESCR process and targeted coalition work; and, in Nigeria, using the new tax acts in force since 1 January 2026 to catalyse a national accountability campaign for adequately funded, quality public services. In Latin America, we will amplify locally led care pilots across 8 countries and turn lessons into influence—advancing care policies that strengthen care organisations, protect care workers’ rights, support unpaid caregivers, include disability and family networks, and redistribute care more equitably.