Mern Phatt
Cambodian Education Forum
Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Innovations and Challenges in Cambodian Education: Youth’s Perspectives
Edited by Kimkong Heng, Koemhong Sol, Sopheap Kaing, and Sereyrath Em
© Cambodian Education Forum 2023
Summary
Higher education has become increasingly vital as a knowledge-based society has emerged, resulting in substantial changes in educational aspects around the world. The goal of the move is to eliminate direct state control while improving system-guiding procedures and providing universities with more autonomy. Cambodia, like other developing countries, is moving toward a knowledge-based society, which means that the government views education as a tool for boosting economic growth and improving social standards and that individuals should be encouraged to be creative, competent, and persistent. Despite some improvements in recent years, Cambodian higher education faces a variety of challenges, including inadequate government oversight, poor teaching quality, a scarcity of academic research, financial constraints, and fragmented management and governance. This chapter examines the current situation of Cambodian higher education in terms of its regulations, governance, and financing. It offers suggestions for improving the higher education sector to enhance the foundation for long-term human capital development.
Keywords: Higher education; regulations; governance; financing; Cambodia
Introduction
Education, particularly higher education, has been the subject of a global debate about its meaning as well as the relevance of the distinction between public and private goods and how the description offered may affect government intervention (Locatelli, 2018). There has been a reduction in government subsidies for higher education when perceived private goods are aimed at maximizing individual gains, but not when perceived public goods are aimed at improving the country (Ahrens & McNamara, 2013). The public and private benefits of higher education are nearly similar in magnitude (McMahon, 2009). Although neoliberalism has promoted privatization and marketization in education (Macpherson et al., 2014), Goal 4 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is to “ensure inclusive and equitable education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all” (UNESCO, 2015, p. 7), reflecting the continued perception of public goods in education as a collective benefit.
It is frequently stated that education has positive externalities in the sense that highly educated people can benefit others financially and non-financially from their presence (De Gayardon, 2019). According to Sen (2010), people are provided the opportunity to realize valued functions and achieve personal well-being by increasing their talents. Furthermore, Sen (2010) also emphasizes the importance of skills, not just because they lead to functional outcomes but also because they represent spheres of choice and freedom. According to human capital theory, we can perceive transformation at three levels as a result of human capital investment: individual, institutional, and societal (Nafukho et al., 2004). We do, however, perceive some of the spillover effects of higher education, such as increased tax revenues, lower unemployment, a higher-quality workforce, civic participation (Bynner et al., 2003), and charitable donations, although it is difficult to quantify these benefits, particularly the external outcomes, when determining the fraction of this sector. Moreover, according to Naidoo (2010), this field has been one of the most important engines driving progress in developing countries since the 1990s. It also offers human resources with which the country, especially in developing countries, can increase its attractiveness and economy (World Bank, 2017). Education is a well-known tool that societies can use to increase their economic growth to compete in the global market; consequently, with education reforms, extending access can aid in advancing social justice (Chen et al., 2018).
The neoliberal trend has permeated all parts of higher education. Rather than focusing on public ownership and administration, the 1990s reform strategy focused on the market (Van Vught, 1992). Universities, thus, can generate their own money with a variety of market-related activities to reduce budgetary limitations (Lee, 2012). With the greater impact of this tendency, numerous features alter, such as from annual line-item budgeting to block grants (Weiler, 2000). Apart from key financial sources such as government funding, funding reforms focus on diverse funding sources, performance-based and competitive funding, and public spending cuts (Schiller & Liefner, 2007). This shift has influenced higher education financing in favor of cost sharing, making private sector participation more prevalent (Goksu & Goksu, 2015). According to Chapman et al. (2010), because a large proportion of the population is impoverished, developing countries provide limited access to education, especially at the highest levels. Therefore, providing financial support for higher education has become a crucial strategy; this includes government-sponsored, institutionally funded, and privately funded assistance programs (Hauptman, 2007). However, it is widely accepted that public funding is critical to increasing educational quality to enhance participation and stimulate research and development funding in underdeveloped and advanced developing countries (Hauptman, 2007; Schiller & Liefner, 2007; World Bank, 2011).
Cambodia, like other developing countries, is transitioning to a knowledge-based society (MoEYS, 2014). This implies that the government perceives education as a tool for stimulating economic growth and enhancing social standards and that it should encourage its citizens to be creative, competent, and persistent. To achieve its national development goals, Cambodia has adopted and improved a variety of policies targeted at enhancing educational quality for the benefit of social and economic progress. Despite improvements, Cambodian higher education still faces significant obstacles, including poor teaching quality (Ahrens & McNamara, 2013), a scarcity of academic research (Heng et al., 2022, 2023), financial constraints (Mak et al., 2019), and management and administration (Williams et al., 2016).
This chapter aims to examine the current situation of Cambodian higher education in three major areas: regulations, governance, and funding. The chapter also makes some suggestions depending on the present situation.
The background of Cambodian higher education
The Cambodian traditional schooling system has long been linked to religious institutions, particularly Buddhism, as a means of educating its people on several topics, such as social conduct, numeracy abilities, and basic literacy, among others. However, conventional education was gradually altered when Cambodia was a French colony, which sparked a secularization of schooling (Leng, 2013). Cambodian modern education, like that of other colonies, is the outcome of external influences, i.e., Western colonial encroachment. Until the early 1900s, the so-called ‘modern French educational system’ was introduced, which was intended for the elite Cambodian groups of the colonial powers (Ayres, 2000; Dy, 2004). However, the country’s educational system received little attention (Chandler, 1991). Some years before the end of the almost century-long French colonial administration, some national institutes were established as the common notion of the Cambodian modern higher education system (Williams et al., 2014). For instance, there were national institutes for studies in economic sciences, law, and politics, and the suzerain state’s educational system had a significant impact on these institutions (Kitamura, 2016). Sam et al. (2012) concluded that issues with the Cambodian educational system included the blending of both systems (i.e., old Khmer and Western), financial restrictions, a shortage of qualified teachers, and poor educational quality.
Aspects of education expanded dramatically in the 1960s after being taken for granted for so long under French colonial rule. In contrast to the colonial era, under the rule known as ‘Sangkum Reastr Niyum’ or ‘People’s Socialist Community,’ Prince Norodom Sihanouk believed that education was the key to modernizing and developing the country, and he actively promoted strategic education initiatives ranging from primary to university education (Clayton, 1995). The financial budget for education received a significant allocation, approximately 20% of the budget during that period (Tully, 2006). The King’s educational strategy led to a rising number of elementary schools, secondary schools, and universities (Chandler, 2008). The Education Ministry was in charge of the governing structure and finances, which included the implementation of a fee-free policy related to scholarship financing for all higher education students (Sloper, 1999). In 1955, only a third of Cambodian children had access to basic education; by 1970, that number had increased to three-fourths, with an increase in high school students from 5,000 to 118,000 and teachers from 7,000 to 28,000 (Becker, 1998). By 1969, King Sihanouk’s regime had built 3,202 primary schools, 163 secondary schools, and nine universities (Ayres, 1999). Higher education expanded faster than the economy’s ability to absorb its graduates into meaningful employment during the late 1960s and early 1970s (Chandler, 2008). According to Dunnet (1993), with its most progressive educational practices, Cambodia could reportedly reach its highest literacy rates compared to its Southeast Asian rivals in the 1960s. Therefore, this accomplishment represents a cornerstone in the state’s efforts to optimize its ability to support education because “for the first time in Cambodian history, the state assumed a genuine presence in the localized world of the country’s rural villages through the erection of schools and, in turn, the appointment of state representatives: teachers” (Ayres, 2000, p. 41).
After more than 15 years of prosperity and peace under the Sihanouk regime, General Lon Nol, supported by the United States, toppled King Sihanouk on March 18, 1970 (Chandler, 2018). Following that, Cambodia became engulfed in armed conflict, while the newly formed government displayed minimal dedication to advancing the education sector or enacting innovative educational strategies and policies (Pov & Kawai, 2020). As a result, the Lon Nol government drastically reduced funding for education and implemented the closure of numerous rural schools (Dy, 2004). Simultaneously, a considerable portion of the national budget was directed toward financing the costs related to war and defense (Pov & Kawai, 2020). Teachers had to abandon their positions; classrooms were destroyed; and students frequently faced difficulties in safely attending school due to the volatile conditions outside their homes (Ayres, 2000).
On April 17, 1975, Pol Pot came to power with the ambition to construct a new Cambodia and proclaimed an end to Cambodian history, which spans almost two thousand years (Chandler, 2008). In this regime, only the most rudimentary reading and numeracy programs were permitted, while official university education and other degrees were discontinued since people were required to labor in factories and fields. In his speech on the Four-Year Plan, Pol Pot emphasized learning letters and numbers as a major goal of basic education (Chandler et al., 1988). However, the regime’s goal was to achieve absolute devotion to its authority and violent repression of critics (Path & Kanavou, 2015). Tens of thousands of instructors and future educators were purposefully targeted for systematic destruction (Clayton, 1998). Unfortunately, the idea of an agrarian utopia, which included city evacuations, the eradication of markets and money, and agricultural collectivization, resulted in Cambodia falling into a tragic history.
The Khmer Rouge regime was overthrown on January 7, 1979, as a result of the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia. However, during the years 1979–1989, up until the withdrawal of all foreign forces, the United Nations prohibited several other countries from providing assistance and donations to Cambodia. The educational sector, exhausted of its most precious resource, was rebuilt from scratch by recruiting people to work as teachers and trainers in schools and higher education institutions (HEIs). People with no educational background were chosen to teach (Becker, 1998), aligning with the saying that goes, “Those who know more instruct those who know less.” Nonetheless, the higher education sector remained stagnant (Duggan, 1997), despite technical support from the communist bloc, such as Vietnam and the former Soviet Union. This sector received little attention during that time, for Cambodia had yet to find a peace agreement among the conflicting groups, such as the Khmer Rouge and two other groups (Smith-Hefner, 1990). It appears that higher education was not the government’s primary focus, as there was still political turmoil, social discontent, and little support for economic transformation.
In the 1990s, after the Paris Peace Agreement and UN-sponsored elections, the educational sector underwent significant modifications since institutional reforms were implemented. Between 1993 and 1997, there were several policies and legislative efforts to handle issues affecting the segment and HEIs (Sloper, 1999). For example, the Education Investment Plan (1995-2000) was an early attempt to incorporate donor assistance into the field of education and was created with financial backing from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to improve and restore higher education in the nation. Meanwhile, the shadow of socialist influence or a Soviet-style higher education system had vanished with the new supremacy of Western Europe, America, and Australia, as well as the approach of privatization and marketization that allowed institutions to earn a profit (Kitamura, 2016). From then on, eight new universities were established between 1979 and 1997 (Vann & Ziguras, 2017), and the public administrative institution emerged and grew into a semi-autonomous institution (Pit & Ford, 2004). Moreover, the emergence of a market economy has raised demand in the job market and the higher education sector. As a result, HEIs have expanded from eight in 1997 to 23 in 2000, 97 in 2010, and 128 in 2021, with an almost tenfold increase in student enrollment from 28,080 in 2000 to 223,221 in 2010 and 201,910 in 2020 (Sok & Bunry, 2021).
Regulations for Cambodian higher education
‘Regulation’ refers to an established system of laws, rules, and standards that stipulates how higher education might improve governance and quality (Healey, 2020). In theory, a free market is optimal because it facilitates economic efficiency and effective resource allocation. This is primarily achieved through the ‘invisible hand’ principle, where market forces of supply and demand steer the economy towards equilibrium. On the other hand, open markets are prone to manipulation, market failures, and wealth disparity. Thus, regulations are mostly used to moderate the benefits and drawbacks of market economies. Likewise, whenever there is a balance between market and government engagement, markets are held in check. As Kennedy and Stiglitz (2013) state, “every successful market economy has been based on achieving an appropriate balance between the market and government” (p. 102).
In recent decades, higher education systems across the globe have shared a common trend (Un & Sok, 2022). This trend, shaped by the principles of neoliberalism, advocates for the participation of the private sector in the establishment of higher education institutions (HEIs). In the case of Cambodia, Un and Sok (2022) noted that this trend ushered in a higher education reform allowing public HEIs to accept self-sponsored students through the introduction of fee-paying programs. Even if the neoliberal agenda had been adopted (Un et al., 2018), this scenario would not have occurred without government intervention. As Article 66 of the Constitution states, “the State shall establish a comprehensive and unified system of education throughout the country, capable of guaranteeing the principles of freedom of education and equal access to schooling.” In collaboration with its partners, the Royal Government of Cambodia adopted a slew of national policies and legislative frameworks.
Among these crucial instruments were the 1992 Sub-Decree on Establishing and Managing Higher and Technical Education Institutions and the Royal Decree on the Legal Statute of Public Administrative Institutions introduced in 1997 (Un & Sok, 2014). These instruments have relaxed the state monopoly, which is very selective and exclusive, admitting only a few students. In 1997, the government adopted public-private partnerships, which formally promoted private higher education providers to complement public ones and permitted public HEIs to offer fee-paying classes (Leng, 2013). As a result, the first private institution, Norton University (NU), was founded in 1997 to provide educational services with reasonable tuition fees. The rapid growth of higher education reached a turning point at that time, from a few thousand students to a quarter-million students and over 100 universities. In addition, in 2002, Sub-Decree No. 54 on University Establishment Criteria was issued to outline the requirements and conditions for the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport (MoEYS) to inspect the university’s establishment. The next year saw the promulgation of the Royal Decree on Accreditation of Higher Education, which sought to create a judicial mechanism to manage accreditation in all HEIs and ensure compliance with international standards. More importantly, the law on education, for the first time in Cambodian education history (Chhinh & Dy, 2009), was issued in 2007 to identify procedures and criteria at the national level for constructing a specified, suitable framework that allows academic freedom based on the Cambodian Constitution. These regulations provide a snapshot of Cambodia’s effort to advance postsecondary education, where the government, especially HEIs, is committed to executing a variety of measures meant to address the most urgent problems.
Despite all of these ongoing reforms, Cambodia will require many more reforms to address policy capacity constraints and create a flexible legal system. Cambodian policies and legal frameworks are in their infancy in terms of formation and execution (Mak et al., 2019). Furthermore, a limited legal framework can prevent higher education from becoming effective because “the lack of direction from the government has made higher education in Cambodia become market-driven and profit-oriented in an uncontrolled way to most extent” (Ros & Sol, 2021, p. 30), and it also causes the country to face a crisis of PhD inflation (Thun, 2021). Furthermore, Cambodian higher education is still in its early stages of development (Un & Sok, 2018). Yet, the broad reform measures aimed at enhancing financial management in academic institutions and bolstering public support have not yielded the desired results thus far (Mak et al., 2019).
Governance of Cambodian higher education
The term ‘governance’ refers to the formal process of organizing and managing HEIs, with an emphasis on fostering transparency and upholding accountability. So, governance or institutional arrangement is utilized by HEIs as a means to regulate organizational and personal conduct (Carvalho, 2020). Along with financing and talent acquisition, governance is one of the most crucial elements in achieving world-class higher education standards (Salmi, 2009). This is due to its influential role in shaping the quality of higher education and its contribution to national growth. Higher education has grown increasingly important, resulting in extraordinary developments in HEIs, limiting direct state control and granting universities more autonomy. According to Berdahl (1990), autonomy is “the power to govern without outside controls” (p. 171). Berdahl (1990) differentiated between two sorts of institutional autonomy: substantive autonomy, in which goals and programs are under the university’s authority, and procedural autonomy, in which goals and programs will be accomplished under the university’s authority. In this environment, a critical evaluation of the accountability and autonomy between the state and HEIs is necessary.
A Royal Decree on the legality of public administrative institutions, introduced by the Cambodian government in 1997, outlines the steps and requirements for public agencies and institutions to become autonomous units known as Public Administrative Institutions (PAIs). Concerning HEI governance and management, this decree is regarded as a crucial shift in the higher education environment in Cambodia. This is an illustration of how Cambodia is working to decentralize power and enhance financial management by granting public HEIs more autonomy. Prior to this shift, the state, with its eight public HEIs, was the exclusive provider of higher education (Un & Sok, 2014). Instead of being controlled directly by a parent ministry, HEIs that have attained PAI status have more autonomy and authority to manage themselves under the direction of the highest governing board, which has at least five delegates from the relevant ministries, including the parent ministry, the Ministry of Economy and Finance, the Council of Ministers, and MoEYS (Touch et al., 2014). Furthermore, many stakeholders are involved in the governance process of Cambodian higher education, as noted by Mak et al. (2019). These include the Joint Technical Working Group on Education, the Sub-Technical Working Group on Higher Education, the Rector Council of Cambodia, the Cambodian Higher Education Association, and the Accreditation Committee of Cambodia.
However, the lack of a ‘checks and balances’ mechanism that can effectively determine the balance between governmental interventions and autonomous HEIs, ensuring transparency and accountability, hinders the development of higher education. Despite the adoption of privatization, Leng et al. (2022) claimed that “the Cambodian higher education system and institutions remain highly state-regulated, state-steered, and centralized” (p. 14). Moreover, the governance structure of higher education is fragmented among parent ministries due to the lack of a cohesive government body (Un & Sok, 2018). In Cambodia, there are now 130 HEIs, 82 of which are privately operated (MoEYS, 2022). MoEYS oversees 82 HEIs, while the other 42 HEIs are supervised by 15 different ministries and state institutions (MoEYS, 2022). Even though the Department of Higher Education appears to perform a significant coordination role, given the number of HEIs that fall under its purview, its duties are somewhat constrained (Sen, 2012).
Financing for Cambodian higher education
The term ‘finance’ in this context refers to the national budget allocated to higher education as part of the government’s successive support for public HEIs to maintain their daily operations and management as well as to encourage participation while upholding the promise of equal opportunity. The development and improvement of higher education are inextricably tied to finance, as sufficient funding can mobilize talent to enhance quality and improve investment in personnel, programs, and equipment (Hauptman, 2007). With a neoliberal approach, the marketization of education becomes a potent force driving diverse types of privatization. This allows universities to generate their own funds to mitigate budgetary limitations by engaging in a wide range of market-related activities. However, finding better ways to raise the quality of teaching and research and increase accessibility for improvised groups within the higher education landscape is a major challenge in the industrialized world (Hauptman, 2007).
Cambodian higher education was predominantly state-controlled, state-regulated, and elite-focused before the advent of public-private partnerships, which officially endorsed private providers of higher education in response to rising local needs. According to Un and Sok (2022), privatization was carried out for at least two reasons: first, the growing demand from high school graduates exceeded the capacity of state-run HEIs; and second, state-run HEIs could no longer guarantee career prospects for their graduates following the dissolution of state-owned businesses and job placement policies, as well as the problem of skills mismatches in the labor market demand.
The Ministry of Economy and Finance establishes rules and regulations for the financial management of public funds. With line-item budgeting, the technical supervisory ministry negotiates and consolidates the annual budget proposals of its public HEIs before submitting them to the Ministry of Economy and Finance for authorization (Mak et al., 2019). However, public support for higher education is modest due to the establishment of for-profit courses at public HEIs and a significant influx of private sector investments into HE. Although Cambodia is moving toward a knowledge-based society, significant improvements to its education policies have yet to be realized, owing in part to the lack of higher education funding. Over the past ten years, public financing for education reached 0.0005% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and constituted less than 10% of overall spending, ranging from 4% in 2012 to 9% in 2016 (Mak et al., 2019). In comparison to its Asian counterparts, Cambodia relies more heavily on private sources for HEIs, primarily through tuition fees and other services, whereas its Asian counterparts lean toward government funding. The three primary sources of funding for Cambodian public HEIs are government financing, student fees, and other income streams such as private donations, consulting services, commercial activities, and contract research (Ting, 2014, as cited in Mak et al., 2019). Due to a lack of public funding for higher education, all public HEIs are dependent on student tuition fees. Therefore, Cambodia is regarded as one of the least-invested countries in higher education in the region, with private sources, especially tuition fees, being the primary and growing source of revenue (Mak et al., 2019). This funding shift has significant implications for educational access and equity. The financial burden has transitioned from reliance on state financing to assist in covering the expenses of teaching students to other sources of revenue, such as tuition fees from students and their families. Consequently, Cambodia lags behind other ASEAN countries in terms of higher education accessibility, with an accessibility rate of 16% in 2014, dropping to 12% in 2015, and further down to 11% in 2016 (Mak et al., 2019).
The ways forward
Cambodia needs to put in more effort to achieve its goal of becoming a knowledge-based society since its higher education issues regarding regulations, governance, and financing have not yet been adequately addressed. By 2020, Cambodia had a total population of 16.72 million, with individuals under the age of 35 accounting for 65.6% of the total (Ministry of Planning, 2020). Unfortunately, 17.8% of the population lives in poverty, and approximately 4.2% in Phnom Penh, along with 12.6% in urban areas and 22.8% in rural areas, fall below the poverty threshold (Khmer Times, 2021). Due to a shortage of qualified workers and an increasing youth population, the country has to expand its education sector, particularly as a solution to educational inequality at higher education levels. Understandably, such an undertaking is long-term, and the results may not manifest for years to come. Nonetheless, the importance of education for economic and social progress necessitates a higher level of government involvement.
In the matter of regulations, despite the fact that Cambodian higher education has grown since the adoption of economic reform, market-driven and profit-oriented practices are becoming increasingly unrestrained, with more laissez-faire and mechanisms to decrease state intervention. Therefore, Cambodia should contemplate this trend carefully. A balanced approach, maintaining harmony between market mechanisms and government intervention, can promote inclusive growth in higher education with equity and accessibility. Moreover, more weight should be given to evidence-based policies than subjective judgments, which should be more involved with the domestic academic and research communities as well as international bodies to build a strong evidentiary and technological foundation on which the government can better improve higher education.
Regarding governance, there is a higher education quality assurance and assessment body called the Accreditation Committee of Cambodia (ACC). However, this committee’s capabilities must be strengthened in order for it to effectively and promptly address issues related to management, complaints about the quality of education, and the challenges associated with system and curriculum development in HE. In addition to giving HEIs more autonomy, accountability must be reinforced. HEIs must be accountable to their stakeholders through transparent and efficient management. Simultaneously, it is crucial to ensure that HE, being an academic entity, functions effectively and efficiently, fostering openness, relevance, and quality in teaching and research while resisting political interference. With strong regulation and effective governance, higher education may expand its capacity, resulting in more equity and access and qualified graduates to respond to the market demand.
In terms of financing, increased investment in higher education is vital for accomplishing national policy objectives. As previously stated, the sector is currently underfunded, putting substantial financial burdens on students and their families. Given the growing youth population and economic development, government spending on higher education should be increased to ensure quality and extend access to justify its redistributive actions. Additionally, a transparent, accountable, and comprehensive financial management system, including block grants as well as performance-based funding, should be fully established. Of course, improving widespread access to higher education through increased state funding requires diverse mechanisms. These may include a redistributive tuition charge model, state grants, provisions for tuition and living expenses, student loans, and scholarship quotas. However, these initiatives are predominantly driven by a combination of political will and genuine commitment. For instance, in the Philippines, de-privatization has occurred as a result of the government’s ability to counter private school influence in legislation (Saguin, 2022).
Conclusion
Higher education has evolved significantly in conjunction with global and regional developments since the concept of a knowledge-based society began. Even with privatization and marketization, with less direct state supervision and more autonomy for universities, the issue of public goods still justifies government intervention and redistribution. Since enacting economic reforms, Cambodia has reaped the benefits of increased international investment and capital inflows, which have been accompanied by an influx of highly skilled employees and the rise of commercial higher education providers to augment the public sector. However, this movement was also sparked by concerns about educational quality, access, and equity, as well as governance. Therefore, Cambodia has much work to do in higher education regulations, governance, and financing and should strengthen its attention to human capital development by reforming higher education to be more modern and adaptable to create a knowledge-driven society. By improving administrative competencies, boosting funding, and refining policy-making processes, the government could drive significant progress in its education sector. This would not only strengthen Cambodian higher education at the national level but also enable it to embrace the internationalized trend by developing more global and regional connections. Furthermore, Cambodia should shift its perspective from solely focusing on the progress made since the “Zero Year.” It would be beneficial to consider the broader global trend and explore potential strategies for elevating the quality of its HE. Of course, the government plays a pivotal role in optimizing the costs and benefits, as expansion inevitably implies additional expenditure. This trade-off should be carefully considered to ensure sustainable growth.
References
Ahrens, L., & McNamara, V. (2013). Cambodia: Evolving quality issues in higher education. In L. P. Symaco (Ed.), Education in South-East Asia (pp. 47–69). Bloomsbury Academic.
Ayres, D. (1999). The Khmer Rouge and education: Beyond the discourse of destruction. History of Education, 28(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/004676099284744
Ayres, D. (2000). Anatomy of a crisis: Education, development, and the state in Cambodia, 1953-1998. University of Hawaii Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780824861445
Becker, E. (1998). When the war was over: Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge revolution. Hachette UK.
Berdahl, R. (1990). Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British universities. Studies in Higher Education, 15(2), 169-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079012331377491
Bynner, J., Schuller, T., & Feinstein, L. (2003). Wider benefits of education: skills, higher education and civic engagement. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 49(3), 341-361. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:3882
Carvalho, T. (2020). Academic perception of governance and management. In P. N. Teixeira & J. C. Shin (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of higher education systems and institutions (pp. 45-50). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8905-9_309
Chandler, D. (1991). The land and people of Cambodia. Harper Collins Publishers
Chandler, D. (2008). A history of Cambodia. Routledge.
Chandler, D., Kiernan, B., & Boua, C. (1988). Pol Pot plans the future: Confidential leadership documents from Democratic Kampuchea, 1976-1977. Yale Center for International and Area Studies.
Chapman, B., Lounkaew, K., Polsiri, P., Sarachitti, R., & Sitthipongpanich, T. (2010). Thailand’s student loans fund: Interest rate subsidies and repayment burdens. Economics of Education Review, 29(5), 685-694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.04.001
Chen, W., Li, X., St. John, E. P., & Hannon, C. (2018). Actionable research for educational equity and social justice: Higher education reform in China and beyond. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351245869
Chhinh, S., & Dy, S. S. (2009). Education reform context and process in Cambodia. In Y. Hirosato & Y. Kitamura (Eds.), The political economy of educational reforms and capacity development in Southeast Asia: Cases of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam (pp. 113-129). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9377-7_8
Clayton, T. (1995). Education and language-in-education in relation to external intervention in Cambodia, 1620-1989. University of Pittsburgh.
Clayton, T. (1998). Building the new Cambodia: Educational destruction and construction under the Khmer Rouge, 1975–1979. History of Education Quarterly, 38(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.2307/369662
De Gayardon, A. (2019). There is no such thing as free higher education: A global perspective on the (many) realities of free systems. Higher Education Policy, 32(3), 485-505. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0095-7
Duggan, S. J. (1997). The role of international organisations in the financing of higher education in Cambodia. Higher Education, 34(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002964131437
Dunnet, S. (1993). Cambodia, overcoming hardship, rebuilding its education system. WENR: World Education News and Reviews, 6(2), 20-23.
Dy, S. S. (2004). Strategies and policies for basic education in Cambodia: Historical perspectives. International Education Journal, 5(1), 90-97. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ903840.pdf
Goksu, A., & Goksu, G. G. (2015). A comparative analysis of higher education financing in different countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 1152-1158. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00945-4
Hauptman, A. M. (2007). Higher education finance: Trends and issues. In J. J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach (Eds.), International handbook of higher education (pp. 83-106). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4012-2_6
Healey, N. (2020). Higher Education systems and institutions, Fiji. In P. N. Teixeira & J. C. Shin (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of higher education systems and institutions (pp. 1018-1021). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8905-9_599
Heng, K., Hamid, M. O., & Khan, A. (2022). Academics’ conceptions of research and the research-teaching nexus: Insights from Cambodia. International Journal of Educational Development, 90, 1-11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102569
Heng, K., Hamid, M. O., & Khan, A. (2023). Research engagement of academics in the Global South: the case of Cambodian academics. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 21(3), 322-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2022.2040355
Kennedy, D., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2013). Law and economics with Chinese characteristics: Institutions for promoting development in the twenty-first century. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.7916/d8-2zxc-6150
Khmer Times. (2021, November 19). Cambodia’s poverty line updated: 17.8 percent Cambodians under the poverty line. https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50973518/cambodias-poverty-line-updated-178-percent-cambodians-under-the-poverty-line/
Kitamura, Y. (2016). Higher education in Cambodia: Challenges to promote greater access and higher quality. In C. S. Collins, M. N. N. Lee, J. N. Hawkins, & D. E. Neubauer (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of Asia Pacific higher education (pp. 365-380). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48739-1_24
Lee, M. N. N. (2012). Institutional autonomy in the restructuring of university governance. In J. N. Hawkins, K. H. Mok, & D. E. Neubauer (Eds.), Higher education regionalization in Asia Pacific: Implications for governance, citizenship and university transformation (pp. 161-175). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137311801_10
Leng, P. (2013). Foreign influence on Cambodian higher education since the 1990s. Mind & Time Publications, 2013/2014, 1–29. https://hdl.handle.net/1807/91939
Leng, P., Eam, P., & Khieng, S. (2022). Cambodian post-secondary education and training: Conceptual scope, historical context, present realities, and new discourses. In P. Eam, P. Leng, S. Khieng, & S. Song (Eds.), Cambodian post-secondary education and training in the global knowledge societies (pp. 3-28). Cambodia Development Resource Institute. https://cdri.org.kh/publication/cambodian-post-secondary-education-and-training-in-the-global-knowledge-societies
Locatelli, R. (2018). Education as a public and common good: Reframing the governance of education in a changing context. Education Research and Foresight Working Papers Series 22. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000261614
Macpherson, I., Robertson, S., & Walford, G. (Eds.) (2014). Education, privatisation and social justice: Case studies from Africa, South Asia and South East Asia. Symposium Books. https://doi.org/10.15730/books.88
Mak, N., Sok, S., Un, L., Bunry, R., Chheng, S., & Kao, S. (2019). Finance in public higher education in Cambodia. Working Paper Series No. 115. Cambodia Development Resource Institute. https://cdri.org.kh/publication/finance-in-public-higher-education-in-cambodia
McMahon, W. W. (2009). Higher learning, greater good: The private and social benefits of higher education. Journal of Education Finance, 35(2), 194-198. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40704385
Ministry of Planning. (2020). General population census of Cambodia 2019: National report on final census results. https://www.nis.gov.kh/nis/Census2019/Final%20General%20Population%20Census%202019-English.pdf
MoEYS. (2014). Policy on higher education vision 2030. https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/en/2014/national-policy-higher-education-vision-2030-6039
MoEYS. (2022). Education congress: The education youth and sport performance in the academic year 2020-2021 and goals for the academic year 2021-2022.
Nafukho, F. M., Hairston, N., & Brooks, K. (2004). Human capital theory: Implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 7(4), 545-551. https://doi.org/10.1080/1367886042000299843
Naidoo, R. (2010). Global learning in a neoliberal age: Implications for development. In E. Unterhalter & V. Carpentier (Eds.), Global inequalities and higher education: Whose interests are we serving? (pp. 66–90). Palgrave Macmillan.
Path, K., & Kanavou, A. (2015). Converts, not ideologues? The Khmer Rouge practice of thought reform in Cambodia, 1975–1978. Journal of Political Ideologies, 20(3), 304-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2015.1075266
Pit, C., & Ford, D. (2004). Cambodian higher education: Mixed visions. In P. G. Altbach, & T. Umakoshi (Eds.), Asian universities: Historical perspective and contemporary challenges (pp. 333-362). Johns Hopkins University Press. https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/asian-universities
Pov, S., & Kawai, N. (2020). Review of changes of education policy for development in Cambodia: From the 1860s to the 1980s. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 26(1), 69-78. https://doi.org/10.15027/48739
Ros, V., & Sol, K. (2021). The quest for world-class universities: A goal for Cambodian universities? Cambodian Journal of Educational Research 1(2), 24-40. https://cefcambodia.com/2021/09/14/1156/
Saguin, K. (2022). The politics of de-privatisation: Philippine higher education in transition. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 52(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2022.2035424
Salmi, J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world-class universities. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-7865-6
Sam, R., Zain, A. N. M., & Jamil, H. (2012). Cambodia’s higher education development in historical perspectives (1863-2012). International Journal of Learning and Development, 2(2), 224-241. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijld.v2i2.1670
Schiller, D., & Liefner, I. (2007). Higher education funding reform and university–industry links in developing countries: The case of Thailand. Higher Education, 54(4), 543-556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-006-9011-y
Sen, A. (2010). The idea of justice. Penguin Books. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/56627/the-idea-of-justice-by-amartya-sen/9780141037851
Sen, V. (2012). Cambodia’s higher education structure and the implications of the 2015 ASEAN economic community. CDRI/Annual Development Review 2012-13, 24-32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314831374_Cambodia’s_Higher_Education_Structure_and_the_Implications_of_the_2015_ASEAN_Economic_Community
Sloper, D. (1999). Higher education in Cambodia: The social and educational context for reconstruction. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000120021
Smith-Hefner, N. J. (1990). Language and identity in the education of Boston-area Khmer. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 21(3), 250-268. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1990.21.3.04x0608j
Sok, S., & Bunry, R. (2021). Cambodian public higher education in 2040: Potential scenarios and the need for transformative leadership. Working Paper Series No. 01. The HEAD Foundation. https://headfoundation.org/2021/05/12/cambodian-public-higher-education-in-2040-potential-scenarios-and-the-need-for-transformative-leadership/
Thun, T. (2021). PhD inflation and the lack of PhDs in higher education in post-civil war Cambodia. Universities & Intellectuals, 1(1), 43-48. https://cerc.edu.hku.hk/universities-and-intellectuals/1-1/phd-inflation-and-the-lack-of-phds-in-higher-education-in-post-civil-war-cambodia/
Touch, V., Mak, N., & You, V. (2014). Governance reforms in higher education: A study of institutional autonomy in Cambodia. In N. V. Varghese & M. Martin(Eds.), Governance reforms in higher education: A study of institutional autonomy in Asian countries (pp. 49-64). UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000227242
Tully, J. (2006). A short history of Cambodia: From empire to survival. Allen and Unwin. https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/eprint/5073
Un, L., Boomsma, L., & Sok, S. (2018). Higher education reform in Cambodia since 1990s: How or what for. The HEAD Foundation Digest, 3-7.
Un, L., & Sok, S. (2014). Higher education governance in Cambodia. Leadership and Governance in Higher Education, 4, 72-94.
Un, L., & Sok, S. (2018). Higher education systems and institutions, Cambodia. In P. Teixeira & J. C. Shin (Eds.), Encyclopedia of international higher education systems and institutions (pp. 1–10). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_500-1
Un, L., & Sok, S. (2022). Higher education policy and project intervention in Cambodia: Its development discourse. In V. McNamara & M. Hayden (Eds.), Education in Cambodia: From Year Zero towards international standards (pp. 215-239). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8213-1_12
UNESCO. (2015). Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656e.pdf
Van Vught, F. A. (1992, June 30–July 4). Autonomy and accountability in government-university relationships [Paper presentation]. The World Bank Worldwide Senior Policy Seminar on Improvement and Innovation of Higher Education in Developing Countries, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Vann, M., & Ziguras, C. (2017). Stakeholder views of quality assurance in Cambodian higher education. In M. Shah & Q. T. N. Do (Eds.), The rise of quality assurance in Asian higher education (pp. 1-14). Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100553-8.00009-4
Weiler, H. N. (2000). States, markets and university funding: New paradigms for the reform of higher education in Europe. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 30(3), 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/713657469
Williams, J. H., Kitamura, Y., & Keng, C. S. (2014). Higher education in Cambodia: Expansion and quality improvement. Higher Education Forum, 11, 67-89. http://doi.org/10.15027/37025
Williams, J. H., Kitamura, Y., & Keng, C. S. (2016). Higher education in Cambodia. In Y. Kitamura, D. B. Edwards, C. Sitha, & J. H. Williams (Eds.), The political economy of schooling in Cambodia: Issues of quality and equity (pp. 167-186). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137456007_9
World Bank. (2011). Putting higher education to work: Skills and research for growth in East Asia. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/2364 World Bank. (2017). Higher education for development: An evaluation of the World Bank Group’s support. https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/evaluations/higher-education-for-development
Cambodian Education Forum 