A oferta de educação Pedro Telhado Pereira. WHAT PROPORTION OF NATIONAL WEALTH IS SPENT ON EDUCATION? EAG – B2 Education at a Glance 2014 e 2015 In 2011,

Apresentação em tema: "A oferta de educação Pedro Telhado Pereira. WHAT PROPORTION OF NATIONAL WEALTH IS SPENT ON EDUCATION? EAG – B2 Education at a Glance 2014 e 2015 In 2011,"— Transcrição da apresentação:

1 A oferta de educação Pedro Telhado Pereira

2 WHAT PROPORTION OF NATIONAL WEALTH IS SPENT ON EDUCATION? EAG – B2 Education at a Glance 2014 e 2015 In 2011, OECD countries spent an average of 6.1% of their GDP on educational institutions; seven countries (Argentina, Denmark, Iceland, Israel, Korea, New Zealand and Norway) spent more than 7%. In 2012, OECD countries spent an average of 5.3% of their GDP on educational institutions from primary to tertiary education; 11 countries with available data (Canada, Chile, Colombia, Iceland,Israel, Korea, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States) spent 6% or more. Between 2000 and 2011, expenditure on all levels of education combined increased at a faster rate than GDP growth in almost all countries for which data are available. Between 2000 and 2012, expenditure on primary to tertiary education increased at a faster rate than GDP growth in more than two out of three countries for which data are available. In the other countries, the share of GDP devoted to education decreased by less than 0.5 percentage point. Since the beginning of the economic crisis in 2008 and up to 2011, the GDP rose, in real terms, in half of the countries with available data, while public expenditure on educational institutions fell in only six countries. In the shorter period between 2009 and 2011, GDP rose, in real terms, in most countries, and public expenditure on educational institutions fell in one-third of OECD countries, probably as a consequence of fiscal consolidation policies. Since the beginning of the economic crisis in 2008 and up to 2010, GDP decreased, in real terms, in 20 of 36 countries with available data, while public expenditure on educational institutions fell in only six countries. As a result, public expenditure as a percentage of GDP decreased in five countries during this period. Still, GDP rose, in real terms, in most countries between 2010 and 2012, and public expenditure on educational institutions fell in more than one out of three OECD countries as a result of fiscal-consolidation policies.

3 Other findings Expenditure on pre-primary education accounts for nearly one-tenth of expenditure on educational institutions, or 0.6% of the GDP, on average across OECD countries. There are large differences among countries. For instance, expenditure on pre-primary education is less than 0.2% of GDP in Australia and Switzerland but about 1% or more in Denmark and Iceland.

4 Primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education accounts for nearly two-thirds of expenditure on educational institutions, or 3.8% of the GDP, on average across OECD countries. Argentina and New Zealand spend the most among OECD and partner countries, with 5% or more of the GDP devoted to these levels of education, while the Czech Republic, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, the Russian Federation, the Slovak Republic and Turkey spend 3% or less of their GDP on these levels. Primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education accounts for two- thirds of expenditure on primary to tertiary educational institutions, or 3.7% of GDP, on average across OECD countries. New Zealand spends the most among OECD and partner countries, with 5.0% of its GDP devoted to these levels of education, while the Czech Republic, Hungary, Indonesia, Japan, Latvia, the Russian Federation and the Slovak Republic spend less than 3% of their GDP on these levels of education.

5 Tertiary education accounts for one-quarter of expenditure on educational institutions, or 1.6% of GDP, on average across OECD countries. Canada, Chile, Korea and the United States spend between 2.4% and 2.8% of their GDP on tertiary institutions. Tertiary education accounts for more than one-quarter of expenditure on educational institutions, or 1.5% of GDP, on average across OECD countries. Canada, Chile, Korea and the United States spend between 2.3% and 2.8% of their GDP on tertiary institutions.

6 Private expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP is highest at the tertiary level, on average across OECD countries. Its share is the highest in Chile, Korea and the United States where it ranges from 1.7% to 1.9% of GDP. Private expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP is highest at the tertiary level, on average across OECD countries. This share is highest in Chile, Korea and the United States, where it ranges from 1.4% to 1.5% of GDP.

7 Expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP, by level of education (2012) From public and private sources of funds 1 Primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiaryTertiaryUndistributed programmes Primary to tertiary (including undistributed programmes) notes Primary and lower secondary Upper secondary Post-secondary non- tertiary All primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary Short-cycle tertiary Bachelor’s, master’s, doctoral or equivalent level All tertiary (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) OECD countries Portugal 2,9 1,5d x(2, 6)4,5 a1,3d d0,1 5,9 OECD average 2,5 1,2 0,1 3,7 0,2 1,4 1,5 0,1 5,3 EU21 average 2,4 1,2 0,1 3,6 0,1 1,3 1,4 0,1 4,9

8 Função de produção do capital humano O que é uma função? Um função é uma relação entre variáveis, sendo uma dependente das restantes. Exemplos: y=f(x), a variável y é uma função da variável x. y=x 2

9 Vamos agora ver de que depende o Capital Humano adquirido Todos temos diferentes habilidades (A) à nascença, a qual é não observável. Esta habilidade inata vai influenciar o capital humano que adquirimos. O capital humano adquirido depende positivamente dessa habilidade

10 O tempo (S) que dedicamos a adquirir capital humano (por exemplo o tempo que passamos a estudar) influencia de modo positivo o capital humano adquirido Os recursos (E) existentes na escola frequentada (alunos/professor, qualidade dos professores, biblioteca) também influenciam o capital humano adquirido

11 O ambiente familiar e social (H). –O capital humano da família influencia positivamente a aquisição de capital humano –Os pares têm muita influência na aquisição de capital humano. É mais fácil educar turmas de alunos “brilhantes”

12 Função de produção do capital humano ΔH = f(A,S,E,H)

13 Formação das turmas: seleção dos alunos, composição e tamanho Seleção dos alunos Dois modos de fazer uma escola de elite –Testar os alunos e escolher os melhores. Custos –Tempo dos alunos –Tempo dos Professores –Fazer a selecção via preço. Os mais hábeis que irão ter maior rendibilidade da educação estarão mais dispostos a pagar Se existir um mercado financeiro que funciona perfeitamente a selecção pelo preço é perfeita

14 Não havendo um mercado financeiro perfeito A selecção pelo mérito é superior à selecção pelo preço No entanto, o Estado não pode deixar de apoiar os estudantes mais pobres

15 Se houver apoio pelo Estado e liberdade de inscrição A melhor escola fica com os melhores alunos A segunda melhor escola fica com os alunos seguintes Assim sucessivamente até à pior escola ficar com os piores alunos. Haverá uma segregação entre os melhores e os piores alunos

16 Mas será a segregação eficiente para a sociedade como um todo? Se o efeito marginal dos pares for crescente então a segregação é óptima Se o efeito marginal dos pares for decrescente então a segregação não é óptima.

17 Efeitos intergeracionais A segregação faz com que os filhos das famílias com mais capital humano frequentem as melhores escolas e obtenham por sua vez adquiram mais capital humano Ao tornarem-se pais, a situação repete-se

18 Estes efeitos levam a que os Estados se oponham à segregação, obrigando a que estudantes dos meios mais desfavorecidos frequentem as melhores escolas.

19 O tamanho da turma Vamos supor que –cada aluno só está atento 98% do tempo da aula. –Para que aula seja produtiva é necessário que todos os alunos estejam atentos Então se a turma tiver só um aluno, então a aula é produtiva em 98% do seu tempo E se tiver n alunos?

20 Se tiver dois alunos –Tempo produtivo 0,98 2 = 0,96 do tempo Se tiver 20 alunos –Tempo produtivo 0,98 20 = 0,67 do tempo Se tiver 40 alunos –Tempo produtivo 0,98 40 = 0,45 do tempo Se tiver 100 alunos –Tempo produtivo 0,98 100 = 0,13 do tempo Se tiver n alunos –Tempo produtivo 0,98 n

21 A evidência empírica é ambígua Krueger (1999) – 11600 alunos afectos aleatoriamente a classes de diferentes tamanhos entre 1985 a 1989 – conclui que os alunos em classes mais pequenas têm melhor resultados. (Krueger, Alan B. 1999. “Experimental Estimates of Education Production Functions,” Quart. J. Econ. 114:2, pp. 497–532). Krueger and Whitmore (2001) - alunos de classes menores vão mais para a Universidade e têm resultados melhores nos exames (Krueger, A.B. & Whitmore, D.M. (2001). The effect of attending a small class in the early grades on college-test taking and middle school test results: Evidence from Project STAR. Economic Journal, 111, 1–28.)

22 Hoxby (2002) – Não encontra efeitos significativos do tamanho da classe (Hoxby, C. (2002) The power of peers: How does the makeup of a classroom influence achievement, Education Next, Summer. Vol 2 (2).) Woesmann and West (2006) – só encontram um efeito negativo significativo do tamanho da classe no sucesso escolar em 4 dos 36 países considerados. (WOESSMANN, L., AND M. R.WEST (2006): “Class- Size Effects in School Systems Around the World: Evidence from Between-Grade Variation in TIMSS,” European Economic Review.)

23 Outras variáveis que podem afectar o sucesso escolar Normalmente os resultados são ambíguos Apesar dos aumentos dos custos e da qualidade da educação os resultados dos estudantes não têm sido muito melhores O ambiente familiar e social parecem ter efeitos maiores do que os recursos utilizados na educação

24 O resultado pouco significativo do aumento de despesas em educação nos resultados educativos pode ser devido ao aumento de despesas ser para levar mais estudantes de “baixa qualidade” a entrarem no sistema o que pode levar até a diminuição dos resultados dos testes. No entanto, haverá um aumento do nível de educação média da população.

25 Eficiência na utilização dos recursos Será que podemos aumentar a produção de capital humano sem aumentarmos os custos? Ou Será que podemos obter a mesma produção de capital humano diminuindo os custos?

26 A solução óptima da minização dos custos será a que resolve Min p 1 E1 + p 2 E2 + p 3 E3 s. a. ΔH = f(A,S,E,H) E = g(E1,E2,E3) Onde Ei são componentes do Ensino, por exemplo professores, qualidade dos professores, biblioteca, entre outros.

27 Porque não atingimos esta solução óptima? O aumento de capital humano pode não ser o único objectivo do sistema educativo. Pode também ter como objectivo aumentar o espírito de cidadania, de cooperação, o sentido estético. Não sendo estes objectivos mensuráveis não podemos verificar se tal está a acontecer.

28 Os professores estarem mais interessados em terem o maior bem estar e não em obterem os melhores resultados para os alunos ou os mais baratos. Neste aspecto é importante o papel dos sindicatos de professores. As escolas não terem autonomia suficiente para tomarem as melhores decisões –Professores do quadro que não podem ser mudados de escola mesmo com a diminuição do número de alunos.

29 Concorrência entre escolas – o que acontece se os alunos forem livres de escolher a escola que desejam –Financiamento aos alunos e não directamente à escola Ensino obrigatório implicar que as escolas devem estar próximo da residência dos alunos

30 Eficiência versus equidade Há uma tendência para as despesas de educação terem um efeito de igualdade dando oportunidade para os elementos menos favorecidos. Esta política pode ser menos eficiente do que dar os recursos aos estudantes mais hábeis e depois fazer a redistribuição através dos impostos.

31 Os mercados financeiros serem imperfeitos justifica a intervenção do Estado de modo a que os jovens de meios mais desfavorecidos tenham capacidade de frequentarem a escola que desejam. A intervenção do Estado não pode ser só nos níveis mais elevados de educação, pois não pode esquecer o apoio nos níveis anteriores.

32 Clements, Benedict, (1999), The Eficiency of Education Expenditure in Portugal, IMF Working Paper No. 99/179. As despesas por aluno em PPC eram modestas A despesa por aluno em relação ao PIB per capita é alta

33 Razões para a despesa por aluno ser alta

34 Os salários dos Professores

35 A eficiência das despesas de educação A eficiência observa-se pelo modo como os inputs se transformam em outputs da educação. Pode-se utilizar uma estimação da fronteira de produção – Free Disposal Hull (FDH)

36 Um exemplo PaísInputOutput A100200 B150180 C200250 D 320

37

38 Quais os países que estão a produzir de modo eficiente? Estão todos com excepção do País B Porquê? Medida da eficiência no uso de inputs – –1 = Eficiente –X(A)/X(B) < 1, não eficiente

39 Medida da eficiência em termos da produção –1 = Eficiente –Y(B)/Y(A) < 1, não eficiente

40 Resultados empíricos Eficiência das despesas em Educação

41

42 Reformas Aumento do Ensino Pré-Primário Consolidação do Parque Escolar

43 Aumento do Ensino Vocacional

44 Sugestões para reformas

45 Tópicos para investigação

46 Bronchi, Chiara (2003) The Effectiveness of Public Expenditure in Portugal, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica, W. P. 198/2003 Education outcomes do not match costs High outlays per student seem to result from high educational staff salaries: in compulsory education, the staff wage bill represents 90 per cent of total spending on education. Geographical restrictions and the limited responsibility of local authority spending have an impact on school size and performance at the compulsory school level. Pupils who are residents in one municipality are not entitled to go to school in another.

47 … while private returns to tertiary education are high The public education system heavily subsidises tertiary education in Portugal. Public university fees are very low and deductible from the personal income tax. At the same time wage premia for people who have a university degree are high and seem to have increased during the 1990s Such heavy subsidisation seems debatable on equity grounds, and because tertiary education tends to be less prone to positive externalities than lower education levels. Moreover, students from a favoured background still account for an important proportion of participants in public tertiary education.

48 Algumas sugestões para reforma Encouraging competition and extending market signals User choice could be strengthened across jurisdictions and between public and private sectors An extended use of price signals could reduce excessive demand for costly public provision

49 AFONSO (2005), ANTÓNIO and MIGUEL ST. AUBYN, NON-PARAMETRIC APPROACHES TO EDUCATION AND HEALTH EFFICIENCY IN OECD COUNTRIES, Journal of Applied Economics. Vol VIII, No. 2, 227-246.

50

51

52 PORTUGAL RETHINKING THE STATE—SELECTED EXPENDITURE REFORM OPTIONS Gerd Schwartz, Paulo Lopes, Carlos Mulas Granados, Emily Sinnott, Mauricio Soto, and Platon Tinios January 2013 INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND Fiscal Affairs Department

53 EDUCATION SPENDING A.Background 64. Portugal’s education system has long underperformed relative to its EU peers, but recent measures have begun to address this issue. Over the last two years, the Portuguese government has been implementing significant reforms focused on strengthening teaching in core subjects, raising curriculum standards (metas curriculares), and improving teacher and student assessments. In addition, to improve cost efficiency and reduce disparities in input indicators relative to other EU countries, the government has also implemented a 10-percentage point reduction in the number of educators.

54 65. The education system is somewhat more fragmented than in other EU countries, with public institutions covering the vast majority of students. As of 2012, there were 81 licensed charter schools covering almost 46,000 students. Their per-student cost is lower, and, on average, they produce better student test scores. 66. There have been significant shifts in the composition of demand for education services. Enrollment at the primary level is projected to shrink by 13 percent over 2010–20, and by 9 percent during 2020–30. Smaller primary school age cohorts will impact on secondary enrollment a decade later, with student numbers projected to fall by 10 percent over 2020–30, notwithstanding the 2011 increase in compulsory schooling from grade 9 to grade 12 (i.e., up to 18 years of age).

55 67. Falling student numbers will necessitate major adjustments to the school network on top of the rationalization that has already begun. For rural areas, the need for adjustment is most severe. Already, the government successfully closed 536 rural school facilities since 2010 and transferred their students to new “school clusters” 68. Meeting an increasing demand for higher education is a challenge, also given the limited scope for student fees. University attendance in Portugal is still highly correlated with family income and private returns to university education are among the highest in the OECD,57 making the impact of tertiary education spending highly regressive (

56 69. Public school teachers have remained a relatively privileged group within society in general and within the civil service in particular. To date, their seniority privileges have not been curbed, and, although there are possibilities for teacher mobility, there is no mechanism to forcefully redeploy permanent teachers from overstaffed schools to schools with shortages of teachers.

57 B. Key Issues 70. Portugal’s education system remains overstaffed and relatively inefficient by international standards. Even a mildly ambitious education sector reform that would bring student–teacher ratios closer to the prevailing EU averages for primary and secondary education (Table 6.3) would imply that 50–60,000 staff (teachers and nonteachers) would have to be cut. 71. Prevailing rigidities in the education system further aggravate the overstaffing problem. Under the system, it is not the more qualified teachers who get redeployed to a position of their choice, but the more senior ones.

58 72. To date, downsizing measures have not targeted the lowest performing or most highly-paid teachers. With some exceptions of voluntary separations, the remaining departures (8,300) were fixed-term contract teachers who did not have their contracts renewed. 73. The current school financing model generates wide disparities of per-student spending and of the resources available across schools. In fact, some schools managed to score well in academic tests although they spent less and served a student population that faced more adverse socioeconomic conditions

59 74. There is evidence that per-student costs are lower in charter schools compared to public schools. The Tribunal de Contas study found that charter school costs were lower by about €400 per student than for regular public schools, while the subsequent MEC working group study estimated the difference at only €50 per student after adjusting for expenditure cuts that have been made since 2009/10.

60 C. Reform Options 75. A main challenge for Portugal's education system is to enhance outcomes while reducing costs, i.e., to do more with less. 76. Continuing the current approach for attrition and school closures would only meet in part the immediate fiscal consolidation goals. 77. Achieving larger savings would require policy options that are geared toward making the education system more flexible and limiting the state’s role as a supplier of education services. –Implement a simple formula-based funding framework that allows money to follow the student. –Apply the special mobility scheme for surplus teachers –Increase student fees for tertiary education

61 Archibald (2008) Robert B., David H. Feldman, Explaining Increases in Higher Education Costs, The Journal of Higher Education, Volume 79, Number 3, May/June, pp. 268-295 DOI: 10.1353/jhe.0.0004

62 “We have shown that cost disease likely has played the most significant role in driving the cost of higher education per FTE student upward over the past 80 years. Thus, the problem over the whole time period has been lagging productivity growth in personal services relative to manufactured commodities. Lagging productivity growth in personal services puts upward pressure on the relative price of these services because wage growth in this sector is not offset by higher labor productivity. More recently, the rising wage premium for highly educated workers has put additional upward pressure on all personal services that rely extensively on educated labor. Higher education is one such sector.”

63 “Clearly, there are those who understand the need to increase productivity in higher education, and there is an active research agenda that seeks to find ways to use information technology more effectively in higher education (see Twigg, 2003). The National Center for Academic Transformation has sponsored a program in course redesign focusing on introductory courses across the curriculum. The potential for quality preserving (or quality-enhancing) cost decreases from more fully integrating information technology into the delivery of higher education may be the greatest in introductory classes that service large segments of the student population. Referring back to Figure 1, if integrating information technology more fully into the design of service delivery can yield productivity gains, then the cost-quality locus shifts downward. Cost decreases could be achieved without reducing quality, or alternatively, higher quality is possible at constant costs.”

64

65 Financiamento da Educação Pedro Telhado Pereira

66 HOW MUCH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION IS THERE? EAG – B3 Public funding accounts for 84% of all funds for educational institutions, on average across OECD countries. Nearly 92% of the funds for primary, secondary and post-secondary non- tertiary educational institutions come from public sources, on average across OECD countries; only in Chile and Colombia is this share less than 80%. Public funding accounts for 83% of all funds for educational institutions from primary to tertiary education, on average across OECD countries. Tertiary institutions and, to a lesser extent, pre-primary institutions obtain the largest proportions of funds from private sources: 31% and 19%, respectively. Public funding for educational institutions, for all levels combined, increased between 2000 and 2011 in all countries (except Italy) for which comparable data are available. However, with more households sharing the cost of education, private funding increased at an even greater rate in more than three-quarters of countries. Nearly 91% of the funds for primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary educational institutions come from public sources, on average across OECD countries; only in Chile and Colombia is this share less than 80%. Of primary to tertiary levels of education, tertiary institutions obtain the largest proportion of funds – 30% – from private sources.

67 Other findings Public funding for educational institutions, including primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education combined, and for tertiary education, increased between 2000 and 2012 in nearly all countries for which comparable data are available. However, at the tertiary level, more households are sharing the cost of education, thus private funding increased at an even greater rate in more than three-quarters of countries. Public funds are mainly allocated to public institutions, but also to private institutions to varying degrees. For all levels of education combined, public expenditure on public institutions, per student, is nearly twice the level of public expenditure on private institutions, on average across OECD countries. However, the ratio varies from less than twice for primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education (1.8) and at the pre- primary level (1.8), to nearly three times (2.9) at the tertiary level. Public funds are mainly allocated to public institutions, but also to private institutions to varying degrees. For primary to tertiary levels of education combined, public expenditure on public institutions, per student, is 91% higher than the level of public expenditure on private institutions, on average across OECD countries. However, the proportion varies from 64% higher for primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education combined to more than double that proportion (151% higher) at the tertiary level.

68 The countries with the lowest amounts of public expenditure per student, in public and private tertiary institutions, are also those with the fewest students enrolled in public tertiary institutions, except Colombia, Mexico and Poland. Five of the six countries with the lowest amounts of public expenditure per student, in public and private tertiary institutions, are also those (except one) with the fewest students enrolled in public tertiary institutions. In most countries for which data are available, individual households account for most of the private expenditure on tertiary education. Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic and Sweden are the exceptions, where private expenditure from entities other than households (e.g. private businesses and non-profit organisations) is more significant than private expenditure from households, mainly because tuition fees charged by tertiary institutions are low or negligible in these countries (with the exception of Canada). In most countries for which data are available, individual households account for most of the private expenditure on tertiary education. Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Sweden and the United Kingdom are the exceptions, where private expenditure from entities other than households (e.g. private businesses and non-profit organisations) is more significant than private expenditure from households, mainly because tuition fees charged by tertiary institutions are low or negligible in these countries (except the United Kingdom).

69 Between 2000 and 2011, the average share of public funding for tertiary institutions decreased from 73.7% in 2000, to 69.1% in 2005 and then slightly to 68.3% in 2011 (on average across the 20 OECD countries for which trend data are available for all years) (Table B3.2c). is trend is mainly influenced by some European countries, where significant changes in tuition fees took place and where enterprises participate more actively in providing grants to finance tertiary institutions. Between 2000 and 2012, the average share of public funding for tertiary institutions decreased from 68.8% in 2000, to 64.9% in 2005 and decreased slightly again to 64.5% in 2012 (on average across the 20 OECD countries for which trend data are available for all years) (Table B3.2b). This trend is mainly influenced by some European countries, where there were significant changes in tuition fees and where enterprises participate more actively in providing grants to finance tertiary institutions.

70 Public and private expenditure on tertiary educational institutions High private returns to tertiary education (see Indicator A7) suggest that a greater contribution to the costs of education by individuals and other private entities may be justified, as long as there are ways to ensure that funding is available to students regardless of their economic backgrounds (see Indicator B5). In all countries, the proportion of private expenditure on education is far higher for tertiary education – an average of 31% (30%) of total expenditure at this level – than it is for primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education (Table B3.1).

71 Educação e Externalidades Bens públicos - não rivalidade - não exclusão Bens privados

72 Externalidades do Ensino Obrigatório -Redução dos custos de transacção -Utilização das novas tecnologias -Natalidade e fertilidade -Novos hábitos de saúde e de alimentação - Atitudes organizativas e financeiras - Hábitos de consumo - Efeitos intergeracionais Aumento da matéria fiscal no futuro

73 No entanto no Ensino Pós- obrigatório As externalidades não são tão fortes - não tem as características de um bem público puro.

74 Imperfeições no mercado - controle da qualidade - problema da escolha intertemporal e de informação - os problemas dos empréstimos mais utilizados pelos mais favorecidos

75 Os "quase-mercados" em educação - financiador - o Estado - fornecedor - Privados educação, saúde, segurança social,... política dos "vouchers" (cheques) - objectivo - redução dos custos, eficiência Desvios - selecção dos candidatos de modo a minimizar os custos.

76 Financiamento do Ensino Superior - custos elevados - custos de educação e de vida dos estudantes - custos de instrução dos estabelecimentos de ES - custos de oportunidade - individual - salário perdido - social - valor da produção não realizada

77 Financiadores do ES - os estudantes - empresas - Estado - receitas de prestação de serviços - formação de adultos - rendimentos de investimentos -... - mecenato

78 Financiadores dos Estudantes - família - Estado - Empréstimos - pelo Estado - não evita a pressão sobre o orçamento - privados - empréstimo hipotecário - prazo curto - não atrai os estudantes mais carenciados acompanhados com bolsas - empréstimo dependente do rendimento - a amortização depende do rendimento - promove mais a eficiência e a equidade - imposto sobre o diploma

79 Ensino Superior Papel social dos Estudantes –Estudante como um jovem cidadão num processo de aprendizagem Bolsas substanciais independentemente da condição financeira dos Pais –Estudante como membro de uma família num sistema de bem-estar limitado Bolsas pequenas dependentes da condição financeira dos Pais. Pequena percentagem de estudantes recebem bolsas.

80 –Estudante como membro de uma família num sistema de bem-estar alargado Bolsas substanciais mas dependentes da condição financeira dos Pais. Grande percentagem de estudantes recebem bolsas. –Estudante como investidores no seu futuro Sistema de empréstimo a serem reembolsados no futuro

81 Financiamento do Ensino Superior Público em Portugal Pereira, Pedro (2009) “Ensino Superior – Valor Económico e Financiamento: Notas de uma Leitura Pessoal”, in Políticas Educativas - Discursos e Práticas, ed. Liliana Rodrigues e Paulo Brazão, Universidade da Madeira e CIE.

82 Exemplo Pensemos num bolo de mel que queremos distribuirpor 10 indivíduos, (5 com mais de 65 anos, reformados e 5 com menos de 65 anos e população activa) Vamos supor que existia um estudo que dizia que para ficarem satisfeitos os maiores de 65 anos deviam comer 80g de bolo e os com menos de 65 anos deviam comer 120g de bolo. Para os satisfazer necessitaríamos de um bolo 1000 g (= 5*80 + 5*120) Vamos agora supor que queremos compensar a população activa aumentando a sua fatia de 25%, ou seja passando a 150g. O bolo terá que passar a 1150g O que fazer se só tivermos um bolo de 800g para distribuir?

83 Dois problemas 1) o tamanho do bolo e 2) o modo como é distribuído. São exactamente estes dois tipos de problemas que temos com o financiamento do Ensino Superior, ou seja o do seu montante e de como é distribuído.

84 Até 2006 A fórmula era baseada em rácios alunos/professores e docentes/não docentes; e nos salários médios dos docentes e não docentes. Depois eram utilizados factores de qualidade e de eficiência. Estes dados eram usados para encontrar custos de referência para cada área e cada instituição.

85

86 7.2.3. Rationes de docentes e de não docentes Ensino universitário: Formação inicialest/docest/ndoc Medicina, Med Dent, Espectáculo6.07.0 Medicina Veterinária8.010.0 Ciência, Eng, Farm, Agr&Pescas10.014.0 Arq, CComun, Psi, CEdu, CDesp, APlást12.020.0 Matemática, FormProf14.028.0 Línguas, Economia, Gestão, Ssociais16.032.0 Letras, Csociais, Contabilidade18.045.0 Direito, CPolíticas20.050.0

87 Formação Avançadaest/docest/ndoc Medicina, Med Dent, Espectáculo5.06.0 Enfermagem, Med Vet, Tecn Saúde8.010.0 Ciência, Eng, Farm, Agr&Pescas8.010.0 Arq, CComun, Psi, CEdu, CDesp, APlást11.022.0 Matemática, FormProf11.022.0 Línguas, Economia, Gestão, Ssociais11.022.0 Letras, Csociais, Contabilidade11.022.0 Direito, CPolíticas11.022.0

88 Ensino politécnico: Formação Inicialest/docest/ndoc Espectáculo5.06.0 Enfermagem, Tecn Dentários, Tecn Saúde8.010.0 Ciência, Tecn, Agr&Pescas, APlást11.018.0 Computação, FormProf14.028.0 Gestão, Cont, Línguas, SSociais, Turismo17.042.0 Formação Avançadaest/docest/ndoc Espectáculo5.06.0 Enfermagem, Tecn Dentários, Tecn Saúde8.010.0 Ciência, Tecn, Agr&Pescas, APlást8.010.0 Computação, FormProf11.022.0 Gestão, Cont, Línguas, SSociais, Turismo11.022.0

89 Após 2007 Os rácios foram substituídos por factores de custo. Mas estes factores são muito diferentes dos de outros países

90

91

92

93

94

95 Problema com a fórmula até 2008 Era a utilização do indicador de qualidade que era a percentagem de Doutores. Este indicador está altamente correlacionado com a remuneração média dos docentes a qual já estava considerada na fórmula, o que muito prejudicava o financiamento das Universidades com menor percentagem de Doutores como era o caso da Universidade da Madeira.

96 Revista Brasileira de Política e Administração da Educação

97 A correcção da fórmula permitiu à Universidade da Madeira ter um aumento de orçamento de quase 16% de 2008 a 2009

98

99

100 Rendibilidade da Educação

101 WHAT ARE THE INCENTIVES TO INVEST IN EDUCATION? EAG A7 Individuals completing tertiary education benefit from substantial returns on investment: they are more likely to be employed and earn more than individuals without tertiary education do. Adults completing tertiary education benefit from substantial returns on investment: they are more likely to be employed and earn more than adults without tertiary education do. On average across OECD countries, the financial return for tertiary-educated people is around twice as large as for those with an upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education. Not only does education pay off for individuals, but the public also benefits from a large proportion of tertiary-educated individuals through greater tax revenues and social contributions. Not only does education pay off for individuals, but the public benefits of education, in greater tax revenues and social contributions from a larger proportion of tertiary-educated adults, also outweigh the cost. The net public return on investment for a man with tertiary education is over USD 105 000 across OECD countries – almost three times the amount of public investment in his education. For a woman, the public return is over USD 60 000, which is almost twice the amount of public investment in her education. Across OECD countries, the net public return on investment for a woman with tertiary education is USD 65 500 over her lifetime – 1.2 times the public cost of investment in her education. For a man, the net public return is over USD 127 400, which is almost 2.5 times the public cost of investment in his education.

102 Other findings Gross earnings benefits from tertiary education, compared with the income of a person with an upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, are USD 350 000 for men and USD 250 000 for women across OECD countries. On average across OECD countries, the calculated financial return to tertiary education for a single worker with no children is around twice as large as returns to such a person with upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education as his or her highest level of attainment. Gross earnings benefits from tertiary education over the course of a lifetime are USD 477 400 for men and USD 332 600 for women across OECD countries.

103 Gross earning benefits for an individual attaining an upper secondary or post-secondary non tertiary degree, compared to benefits for an individual who has not attained this level of education, are particularly high in Austria, the Netherlands (for a woman), Norway and the United States. In these countries, they amount to at least USD 260 000 for a man and USD 160 000 for a woman. Gross earnings benefits for an adult with upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary degree, compared to benefits for an adult who has not attained this level of education, are particularly large in Austria, Luxembourg and the United States. In these countries, gross earnings benefits amount to more than USD 400 000 for a man and USD 250 000 for a woman over their lifetime. On average across the 28 OECD countries with available data, the public return (net present value) for a man who completed upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education is about USD 39 000 compared with a man who did not complete that level of education. For a woman, the public return is USD 24 000. On average across the 26 OECD countries with available data, the net public return for a woman who completed upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education is about USD 48 000 compared with a woman who did not complete that level of education. For a man, the net public return is USD 70 300. With few exceptions, the net private returns related to attaining a tertiary education exceed those related to attaining upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education. Only in Norway and Sweden does upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education bring higher returns to men.

104 Across OECD countries, individuals invest about USD 50 000 to earn a tertiary degree. In Japan, the Netherlands and the United States, average investment exceeds USD 100 000 when direct and indirect costs are taken into account. Across OECD countries, people invest around USD 55 000 to earn a tertiary degree. In the Netherlands and the United States, average investment exceeds USD 100 000 when direct and indirect costs are taken into account.

105 Financial returns on investment in education This indicator provides information on the costs and benefits of education and the incentives to invest in education. It assesses the economic benefits of education for an individual by estimating the earnings premiums of higher levels of education, taking into consideration the direct and indirect costs and benefits of attaining those levels of education. Besides higher earnings compared to individuals with lower education levels, the probability of finding work, expressed in monetary terms by the variable called the “unemployment effect”, is also a benefit (see Definitions section below). Costs include direct costs, notably tuition fees, and indirect costs due to higher income taxes, social contributions levies, loss of salary because of delayed entry into the labour market, and fewer entitlements to social transfers, such as housing allowances, family allowances or supplemental social welfare benefits. In addition, social contributions and income taxes account for a certain percentage of the income and tend to be higher for individuals with more advanced education because they tend to earn more.

106 Private costs and benefits for a man attaining tertiary education (2011) As compared with a man attaining upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP Notes Direct costs Foregon e earning s Total costs Earnings benefits decomposition Total benefits 1 Net financia l returns Intern al rate of return Gross earnings benefits Income tax effect Social contribu tion effect Transfe rs effect (1)(2) (3)=(1) +(2) (4)(5)(6)(7)(8) (9)=(8) +(3) (10) Portugal - 8 600 - 24 500 - 33 100 522 100 - 177 300 - 57 400 0 279 500 246 400 18,7 % OECD average - 13 200 - 43 500 - 56 700 477 400 - 137 000 - 46 700 - 500 288 600 229 000 14,0 % EU21 average - 8 200 - 43 700 - 51 800 484 600 - 145 800 - 54 700 - 700 279 400 222 000 15,5 %

107 Private costs and benefits for a woman attaining tertiary education (2011) As compared with a woman attaining upper secondary or post- secondary non-tertiary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP Notes Direct costs Forego ne earnin gs Total costs Earnings benefits decomposition Total benefit s 1 Net financia l returns Intern al rate of return Gross earning s benefit s Income tax effect Social contrib ution effect Transf ers effect (1)(2) (3)=(1) +(2) (4)(5)(6)(7)(8) (9)=(8) +(3) (10) Portugal - 8 600 - 22 500 - 31 100 413 600 - 119 700 - 45 500 0 248 300 217 200 20,5 % OECD average - 13 200 - 43 900 - 57 200 332 600 - 81 800 - 36 100 - 4 000 208 300 145 200 11,5 % EU21 average - 8 200 - 43 900 - 52 100 338 900 - 89 600 - 41 400 - 5 500 199 800 137 700 12,2 %

108 Public costs and benefits for a man attaining tertiary education (2011) As compared with a man attaining upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP Notes Direct costs Forego ne taxes on earning s Total costs Earnings benefits decomposition Total benefits 1 Net financial returns Intern al rate of return Income tax effect Social contribut ion effect Transfe rs effect (1)(2) (3)=(1)+ (2) (4)(5)(6)(7) (8)=(7)+( 3) (9) Portugal - 31 400 - 3 000 - 34 300 177 300 57 400 0 211 800 177 500 11,5 % OECD average - 49 000 - 5 000 - 53 900 136 600 46 300 500 185 800 127 400 10,6 % EU21 average - 52 600 - 4 000 - 56 400 145 800 54 700 700 203 400 142 200 11,7 %

109 Public costs and benefits for a woman attaining tertiary education (2011) As compared with a woman attaining upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs for GDP Notes Direct costs Forego ne taxes on earning s Total costs Earnings benefits decomposition Total benefits 1 Net financial returns Interna l rate of return Income tax effect Social contribu tion effect Transfe rs effect (1)(2) (3)=(1)+ (2) (4)(5)(6)(7) (8)=(7)+( 3) (9) Portugal - 31 400 - 2 700 - 34 100 119 700 45 500 0 158 900 124 800 11,0 % OECD average - 49 000 - 5 000 - 53 900 81 500 35 800 3 900 123 600 65 500 8,6 % EU21 average - 52 600 - 3 900 - 56 400 89 600 41 400 5 500 140 200 79 300 9,9 %

110 A educação nos censos População residente do sexo feminino com 15 e mais anos por nível de escolaridade completo mais elevado segundo os Censos (%) Sem nível de escol arida de Básic o 1º ciclo Básic o 2º ciclo Básic o 3º ciclo Secu ndári o Médio Super ior Anos19602011196020111960201119602011196020111960201119602011 Portugal 72,1 12,9 25,3 26,9- 10,8- 17,2 2,3 15,5-┴ 0,8 0,3 15,9 Continente 72,0 12,9 25,3 26,8- 10,6- 17,2 2,4 15,5-┴ 0,8 0,3 16,0 Região Autónoma dos Açores 72,0 10,7 26,3 29,0- 15,9- 17,7 1,6 13,3-┴ 0,8 0,1 12,6 Região Autónoma da Madeira 74,4 14,4 24,1 28,0- 12,3- 15,5 1,4 14,7-┴ 1,2 0,1 14,0 Ilha da Madeira 74,4 14,5 24,1 28,0- 12,3- 15,4 1,5 14,6-┴ 1,2 0,1 14,0 Calheta [R.A.M.] 73,1 21,7 26,5 34,5- 10,9- 11,7 0,4 11,6-┴ 0,9 0,0 8,7 Câmara de Lobos 83,4 18,6 16,3 31,9- 14,7- 16,1 0,3 11,4-┴ 0,9 0,0 6,4 Funchal 67,5 11,0 29,2 25,5- 11,8- 16,2 3,1 15,8-┴ 1,2 0,2 18,5 Machico 78,9 16,4 20,7 33,9- 12,1- 14,2 0,4 11,7-┴ 1,3 0,0 10,5 Ponta do Sol 79,1 18,1 20,2 33,0- 13,6- 0,6 11,5-┴ 0,8 0,0 9,4 Porto Moniz 80,7 29,7 18,9 34,1- 12,1- 10,0 0,4 7,6-┴ 0,4 0,0 6,1 Ribeira Brava 79,2 23,4 20,4 30,3- 11,9- 12,1 0,3 12,2-┴ 0,7 0,0 9,4 Santa Cruz 72,9 9,2 26,5 22,5- 12,4- 17,8 0,6 19,5-┴ 2,1 0,0 16,4 Santana 85,4 25,3 14,2 34,3- 10,8- 10,5 0,4 10,3-┴ 1,0 0,0 7,8 São Vicente 81,1 25,5 18,1 32,4- 11,9- 10,7 0,8 10,9-┴ 0,4 0,0 8,2 Ilha de Porto Santo 75,4 9,3 23,7 26,8- 12,2- 18,1 1,0 20,2-┴ 0,8 0,0 12,7

111 População residente do sexo masculino com 15 e mais anos por nível de escolaridade completo mais elevado segundo os Censos (%) Sem nível de escolaridade Básico 1º ciclo Básico 2º ciclo Básico 3º ciclo SecundárioMédioSuperior Anos19602011196020111960201119602011196020111960201119602011 Portugal 60,6 7,6 34,6 27,5- 15,1- 21,2 3,7 16,0-┴ 1,1 1,1 11,6 Continente 60,0 7,4 35,1 27,4- 14,9- 21,2 3,8 16,2-┴ 1,1 1,1 11,7 Região Autónoma dos Açores 69,8 10,3 27,2 29,1- 20,3- 20,7 2,6 11,4-┴ 1,0 0,5 7,3 Região Autónoma da Madeira 68,8 10,5 28,3 28,2- 17,6- 20,1 2,4 13,4-┴ 1,2 0,5 8,9 Ilha da Madeira 68,8 10,5 28,4 28,3- 17,6- 20,0 2,4 13,4-┴ 1,2 0,5 9,0 Calheta [R.A.M.] 72,9 17,0 26,4 34,1- 15,4- 16,6 0,5 10,0-┴ 0,7 0,2 6,1 Câmara de Lobos 83,0 16,2 16,5 32,2- 20,9- 18,3 0,4 8,4-┴ 0,7 0,1 3,4 Funchal 56,7 7,2 37,0 25,6- 16,2- 20,9 5,3 15,8-┴ 1,4 1,1 12,8 Machico 73,0 10,7 26,2 35,2- 18,8- 18,9 0,7 10,6-┴ 0,8 0,1 5,0 Ponta do Sol 77,2 16,1 21,8 32,2- 17,9- 17,0 0,8 10,2-┴ 0,6 0,2 6,0 Porto Moniz 76,1 20,3 23,0 37,1- 16,2- 12,5 0,7 9,1-┴ 0,6 0,2 4,2 Ribeira Brava 78,6 15,6 20,8 32,2- 18,4- 17,5 0,4 10,3-┴ 0,7 0,1 5,4 Santa Cruz 66,9 6,9 32,1 22,4- 19,0- 24,0 0,9 16,3-┴ 1,7 0,2 9,6 Santana 83,4 19,1 16,0 34,6- 15,4- 0,5 9,8-┴ 1,1 0,1 4,6 São Vicente 79,9 20,4 19,0 34,7- 16,8- 13,5 0,9 9,6-┴ 1,0 0,1 4,0 Ilha de Porto Santo 71,9 7,8 26,5 26,4- 17,8- 23,8 1,5 16,3-┴ 1,7 0,1 6,3 Porto Santo 71,9 7,8 26,5 26,4- 17,8- 23,8 1,5 16,3-┴ 1,7 0,1 6,3

112 Bibliografia Geral Nível Elementar Cabrito, B. G. (2002) Economia da Educação, Texto Editora, Cacém Nível Avançado Checchi, Daniele (2006), The Economics of Education – Human Capital, Family Background and Inequality, Cambridge University Press