The finance of recurrent education: Some theoretical considerations

Abstract

In this short paper I wish to concentrate on two matters: (a) the analytical basis of government involvement with the financing of recurrent education, and (b) certain practical aspects of this involvement whatever its analytical foundation. In doing this, there are two background assumptions to be noted. Firstly, I shall discuss only the mixed economy as we know it, rather than an idealised system which may or may not be possible, but certainly does not actually exist. Secondly, I shall not go out of my way to distinguish ‘education’ from ‘training’, either in terms of content specifically of use to the individual or firm, institutional location, or method of instruction.¹ The first of these assumptions do not mean that I shall refrain from drawing our attention to policy changes of a fundamental kind, and the second does not cause me to ignore the usual questions of ‘who benefits?’ and ‘who pays for?’ recurrent (or any other kind of) education.

This paper has benefitted significantly in several places from Mark Blaug’s criticisms, although our views on this subject in general rarely coincide.