Comments

Thanks for your important question Steve. Since my background is in infrastructure I will restrict my comments to that aid sector. In my opinion there is little government/donor willpower to insist on accountability from recipient governments. Time and again I (and colleagues) have not been able to get even basic tasks done by local government staff (such as taking measurements on a construction site) nor to have them turn up for meetings, despite numerous requests. Additionally, donor government and embassy staff in country often have difficulty understanding the work that engineers do. I have seen instances where consultants with no tertiary background in engineering have been hired to oversee infrastructure works, for example. There is also often very little rigorous follow-up of projects and programs by the donor and equally little emphasis on maintenance programs. This results in infrastructure that sits and decays. These factors, and many more, lead to inefficiencies that create a dependence on aid rather than a local enhanced capacity to plan and deliver vital infrastructure unassisted. See also my previous comments.

Many thanks Lynne. You have made a good point bringing up the risks in an overemphasis in innovation in infrastructure rather than the delivery and community engagement. While innovation in infrastructure in the concept and design phase can lead to positive improvements in value for money and practicality, the whole process of delivery and community engagement and considerations of sustainability are vitally important. I have limited work experience in PNG but have lived and worked in the Pacific, Indonesia and African countries, where there is a village structure, for many years. I imagine that the approach we used in these other localities could easily be translated to PNG. One good example of innovative infrastructure that I have worked on was the Child Friendly Schools built by UNICEF following the 2004/5 tsunami and earthquake in Indonesia. These schools had a practical but innovative design concept that suited the climate and conditions and were built relatively cheaply to high engineering design standards. There were strict contractor oversight measure in place to ensure good quality construction and school and village communities were engaged and given comprehensive but realistic maintenance manuals to help ensure sustainability. In such locations (and this particularly includes the Pacific) this is an effective way to achieve buy-in of the community and to prolong the life of the asset. In my view one of the abiding priorities when delivering infrastructure to emerging economies is capacity building of local government staff and contractors. Too often, the aim is to build some item of infrastructure and consider this as an end product. If capacity of locals is not developed as part of this process then I would consider that the aid funding has not delivered value for money. In every locality I have worked in local contractors have needed to enhance their skills considerably in areas such as quality control, contract management, project management, financial administration, procurement, etc. If they don’t move forward with these skills they will never be able to compete with international contractors and will miss out on ever more lucrative contracts. As a consequence an important economic opportunity is lost, not merely for the contractors but for the local economy. Government employees who oversee infrastructure planning and delivery also need to have these same skills so that they can effectively oversee large projects and programs of work. It is also vital to have international engineers involved in any infrastructure program to ensure that good engineering design is incorporated and that quality requirements are strictly controlled. As an example of the need for high quality engineering throughout the life of an infrastructure project it is a sobering exercise to look at the construction of a school: once that school is built most of the construction faults will not be apparent until it fails in the next earthquake.

Agreed, but this does beg the questions why, what could be better assistance at whatever level of aid and, after some 40 plus years of this so-called “Pacific Paradox”, how could recipients and international agencies learn to do better?

Thank you for the information. Very insightful.

Very interesting read and insights, Carolyn. I recently learnt that the DFAT Innovations Fund in PNG was managed by the DFAT Infrastructure team. What is the risk in your view that this leads to an overemphasis on innovation in infrastructure (the physical assets) rather than innovations in delivery and community engagement, from my experience a formidable (larger?) challenge in PNG. Be very interested in your thoughts. Congratulations on a great article. Kind regards - Lynne Shori

Interesting read. I’m curious what sector the increased aid in the Pacific will go to. Australia is withdrawing aid that support women, girls, governance, capacity building etc. in Pakistan & Indonesia to increase its aid in the Pacific. Will the increased aid fund the same priorities it funded in these two countries? Or will it be directed towards infrastructure in the Pacific because that’s where the Chinese are investing?

This is a great post. It is quite helpful to us. As we all know that <b><a href="https://wildeinc.org/" rel="nofollow ugc"> women empowerment </a></b><b> has ushered all the way since its inception, this blog is relatable to that. Thank you.</b>

Thank you Albert Schram for your insightful comments concerning this blog. Firstly, the main objective of all higher learning institutions is obviously to produce quality and competent graduates based on international standards so that they could meet the demands of the workforce thus it wouldn’t be a challenge in PNG if the university council and its management step up in their performance to address the challenge seriously. Secondly, speaking of quality through meritocratic measures, you mentioned Unitech having its internal vetting system when it comes to selection through independent ACER aptitude test which is a great idea and should be perhaps adopted by other universities because universities can’t just rely on selection recommendations made by the DHERST. The same concept should also be applied to those students who are eligible for loans but have left their studies for few or some years due to lack of funds. It’s not good enough to provide the loans to students who are eligible to obtain the loan without testing whether they are eligible to continue their studies or not. But as you said, TESAS and HELP are applicable in developed countries and PNG as a developing country should prioritize full scholarship instead. Finally, I think to ensure quality in teaching and learning and to improve internal structure of the universities in terms of having the proper facilities and to establish partnership to receive foreign aid lies entirely with the respective university council and its administration. The prosperity of a university is as effective and good as its administration and the council members. Once again, thank you for your comments.

Thank you Michael for your thoughtful comments. 1. The issue of whether to consider high GPA for HELP is still questionable between DHERST and the government. As you said, DHERST wants to consider GPA and I mean high GPA as one of the requirements for HELP but on the other hand as per DHERST’s second media release, GPA is NOT a prerequisite for HELP which was a direct statement from the government. The issue is still debatable between government and DHERST based on the fact that the government is trying to address the issue of quantity while DHERST is trying to address the issue of quality especially in terms of the outcome of the HELP scheme. 2. ‘Guarantee’ was one of the terms of the TESAS loan program back in 2000 to 2007 but it did not work out the way it was intended. ‘Wantok’ as you said could mean loan recipient’s parents, a guardian or any groups that the loan recipient is affiliated with and for them to willingly accept the terms to repay the loan in the event that the recipient did not find a job two years after graduation is something that needs to be considered between the loan recipient and the wantok. Back in 2007, those wantoks when approached by OHE refused to repay the loans as reported in one of the sources that I provided in the blog. Therefore you are right, requiring a wantok for loan repayment is illogical and totally impractical even for a graduate who is earning below certain threshold of K600 per fortnight. 3. Your third point is quite interesting though because PM Marape was the only one being active on media trying to clarify the confusion among students and parents between TESAS and HELP in terms of whether HELP would replace TESAS. The first media statement released by DHERST was very clear that TESAS would ‘cease for good’ in the second semester and HELP would continue from there, which was a direct instruction from the PM and DHERST minister which came out on both online and offline medias, but the second press release was that both would coexist and HELP will start in first semester instead. Apparently, to date we don’t even know whether TESAS would cease for good this year but as you said, let’s see if the goalpost is going to change in the coming weeks and months as the HELP is rolled out. Thanks again for your comments.

Thank you Dr Watson for your comment. For this scheme to succeed or not is entirely dependant on how it would be implemented starting this year either in the first or second semester. What’s really important though, as you pointed out, is to have very good university graduates (which Albert Schram mentioned in the first line of his comment) who are trained at international standards. But the loan scheme, if you read the second media statement released by DHERST, is purposely to address the issue of quantity and not quality. GPA is not even a requirement for HELP and to invest K200m in such a non-compulsory loan scheme with an expectation of producing quality to meet demanding workforce is not a good idea of investing in human capital, especially in a developing country. So probably the government needs to reconsider the terms before rolling out the HELP scheme. Thank you.

Hi Satish, thanks for your comment. As I stated in the blog, this is the second time the government of PNG has introduced a tertiary loan program and the implementing government agencies are working so hard to ensure that the repayment process is set right. In doing so, individuals who are interested to obtain funds through HELP are being asked to register for NID (National Identification Card) because as soon as they are being given NID, they would also get what is called a Tax Identification Number (TIN) to ensure future repayment of the loan as soon as they are being employed after graduation. At this point, we just have to see how this is going to work but I do really appreciate your points in terms of PNG learning from her neighboring countries like Australia, NZ and Fiji on how they’ve been implementing their higher education loan schemes before implementing the HELP scheme.

Thanks Moses for this excellent overview and analysis. As Dr. Watson points out the real challenge for universities is to produce graduates with competences commensurate with international standards (the only standards), and can find fitting employment. How to transform PNG universities? The first step is to assure student selection is meritocratic and not driven by political patronage or bribing. At UNITECH we therefore made independent ACER aptitude test compulsory, review the selection process and strictly adhered to it. In this contect, the recent message from Minister Kuman DHERST "Don't turn students away" is ominous. Translated it means: don't turn students away who were recommended by me or my friends in government. Secondly, assuring access for the talented. The current system needs a reboot, because the governors chipping in with the best intentions, however, create a lot of inequity and chaos. In my view, in a developing country full scholarships should be given. The state's investment is earned back many times over by a graduate paying income taxes. A non-graduate in PNG is highly likely to end up in the informal sector and never pay income tax. TESAS and HELP are schemes for industrialized countries, with no justification or useful application in the PNG context. Finally, universities must demonstrably work on the broader academic quality agenda - which is official government policy - and assure teaching is effective. Otherwise even the best selection and access policies are fruitless. At UNITECH, we revised the criteria for academic appointments and promotions, which have to be meritocratic. We engaged in a professional accreditation process and created a certificate program on student-centered teaching. We also engaged with industry to assure some equipment in teaching laboratories was actually working. We received no Australian aid at all for these efforts, with all support going to UPNG who, to say the least, had not been trail blazing in terms of the quality agenda or university reform. In 2012 with new LNG revenue to be invested in health and education, and new leadership at UNITECH after the Sevua Inquiry, there was one chance to achieve this transformation. Today, UNITECH management, however, is undoing most of this. We are back at non-functional teaching laboratories, no internet, no reliable power supply, and teaching programming with programmable calculators from the 1970s. The current UNITECH Council and management just found it too hard to stay the course and do the right thing. Universities reform postponed for another decade at least, until the current crop of university administrators and board members has withered away in total ineffectiveness and futility.