Japan, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Regionalism

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Professor Shujiro Urata, from Waseda University, is speaking on "Japan, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and regionalism". The region referred to is the Asia-pacific and East Asia.

Professor Urata started by pointing out Japan's deflation, increasing government debt, low labor productivity, declining savings rate and declining population. He showed a diagram of the electronics production between Korea, China and Japan and then exported to the USA. He compared this complex arrangement with the simpler North American production, between the USA and Mexico. An even more complex process is for production of hard disk drives in Asia. He also pointed out there are more free trade agreements in existence and proposed. One curious aspect of Professor Urat's presentation was the lack of mention of service industries. After iron ore, coal and natural gas, education is Australia's fourth largest export earner.A TPP which increases access to manufacturing industry is not much use to Australia.

It would be interesting to compare the international production of electronic goods with education. It the educated student is considered the "product", how international is that education? My interest is in the TPP and higher education services. Jessop (2016) discusses efforts by Asian countries to become knowledge based economies (KBE), including Taiwan's  ‘Green Silicon Island’ strategy and ‘e-Taiwan’ project, South Korea's "Brain Korea 21" and "Brain Korea 21 Plus" for national innovation, Singapore's ‘Intelligent Island’ and ‘Intelligent Nation 2015’. Jessop (2016) identifies the OECD as an advocate for economic development trough vocational training and lifelong learning. As part of this education becomes an arm of economic, rather than social, development and an international industry.  Bhoothalingam (p. 51, 2016) suggests that India could regain its historic role as a provider of regional education, given its strength in English language high volume delivery of courses using IT. Lester (2013) draws a link between trade liberalization and on-line university courses, particularly MOOCs.

Jen T. Kwok, from the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), suggests:

• "The capacity for future Australian governments to direct public subsidies for education appears to be protected (as a result of civil society and union pressure) through Chapter 10 and Annex II: Schedule for Australia, and specifically in relation to: autonomy in admissions policies, setting tuition rates, development of curricula or course content; non-discriminatory accreditation and quality assurance procedures for education and training institutions; government funding, subsidies or grants; the need for education and training institutions to comply with non-discriminatory requirements related to the establishment and operation of a facility."

• "However, Chapter 9, the Investment Chapter has the effect of locking-in and intensifying pressures of commercialisation and privatisation. It establishes rules that bind nation-states not only on the basis of regulatory differences between domestic and non-domestic investors, but on the basis of an effect that results in ‘expropriation’ or ‘nationalisation’ of an investment for international providers, including in relation to changes to ‘licences, authorisations, permits and similar rights’ conferred pursuant to the law. This means, a for-profit VET provider owned from overseas could demand compensation from the Australian government if they changed laws which meant that they could not enrol domestic students or could not access public subsidies where those requirements would mean a loss of investment."
• "Some Chapters indeed facilitate trade in private education. Article 10.6 means Australian ‘service suppliers’ (higher education providers) are not required to establish a company in the relevant nation for the purposes of cross-border supply (also means MIT does not need a local campus to deliver Engineering course to Australia). Australia has a side agreement with Vietnam which effectively prevents them from re-nationalising higher education."
• "In relation to academic mobility, Chapter 12 empowers short term stays for skilled and non-skilled labour because the phrase ‘business person’ is so broadly defined. There are more strict regulations in terms of the recognition of qualifications but these can be easily diluted if our government reaches an agreement with another nation to accept the qualification status of professionals from another country."
• "Australian education providers are now able to compete for government procurement contracts in relation to:
  
  o Primary, secondary, and higher education services in Brunei Darussalam, Japan, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico and Peru;
  o Adult education services in Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Japan, Malaysia and Peru; and
  o Research and development services in Brunei Darussalam and Peru." 

From: TPP impacts on education and education services, NTEU, 16 November 2015

References

Bhoothalingam, R. (2016). The Silk Road as a Global Brand. China Report, 52(1), 45-52. Retrieved from http://chr.sagepub.com/content/52/1/45.full.pdf

Jessop, B. (2016). Putting higher education in its place in (East Asian) political economy. Comparative Education, 1-18. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03050068.2015.1128659

Lester, S. (2013). Liberalizing cross-border trade in higher education: The coming revolution of online universities. Cato Institute Policy Analysis, (720). Retrieved from http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa720.pdf

Trade Agreement Opens Australian Universities and TAFES to Online Competition

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement was finalized in October 2015. Australia and eleven other countries, including the USA, Japan, Canada,and Singapore and Malaysia. The agreement comes into force when ratified by all the countries, or 2 years after those with 85% of the GDP sign up. A two page TPP Education Services Fact Sheet (DFAT, 12 October 2015) outlines the implications for education, including on-line courses, by Australian academics working overseas and international students. The most interesting is the way the TPP will open Australian higher education to competition from overseas institutions.

DFAT states:

"Online education presents a growing opportunity to provide greater numbers of students with flexible, high-quality and internationally-recognised skills and qualifications. ... Australian universities and vocational institutions ... will benefit from guaranteed access to most TPP markets ...". 

However, it should be noted that such arrangements are usually reciprocal, implying that universities and vocational institutions in the 12 countries will be able to offer on-line courses to Australian students. It will be interesting to see if Australian students studying at overseas institutions will receive the same access to HECS-HELP Student Loans, as at domestic campuses. Also it will be interesting to see how overseas institutions are accredited, to be the equivalent of Australian universities, and training organizations.

Limiting access to student loans, or limiting accreditation may be seen as a restriction of trade and illegal under the TPP. Australia has much stricter rules about what can be called a "university" than other countries. If overseas "universities" can market to Australian students, they will have an advantage over local institutions which cannot be called a university.

Trans-Pacific Partnership Applies to Educaiton

The full text of the draft "Trans-Pacific Partnership" (TPP) agreement between Australia and eleven other countries, most notably the USA, but excluding China: (Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam). What is not clear is the extent to which the agreement applies to education and qualifications. Is a qualification awarded by an educational institution in a TPP country accepted for employment purposes in Australia? Must students of TPP countries be charged the same fees by Australian universities as Australian students? Must the Australian government provide the same subsidized loans to Australian students enrolling in TPP institutions, as they do for Australian institutions?

This will become increasingly important as e-learning is applied for vocational qualifications. As an example, will Australia be required to recognize qualifications which Australian students obtain on-line from US universities? Will the Australian government be required to provide the same student loans for US university courses as they provide for Australian courses?

There is currently concern in Australia over unscrupulous Registered Training Organizations (RTOs) signing up students to unsuitable courses to obtain government subsidized fees. However this is minor compared to the problems with student loans in the USA.

A search of the text for the word "education" (excluding the names of education departments), finds 60 references (twenty mentioning Australia). There is a section about "Strategic Partnership" arrangements for education, but which does not seem to be binding. One aspect of the agreement is that many details are still to be worked out, as the "Summary of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement" says: 

"The Development chapter includes three specific areas to be considered for collaborative work once TPP enters into force for each Party:  ... (3) education, science and technology, research, and innovation."

The "TPP Fact Sheet" (presumably not part of the formal text) says:

"Peru ... Increased services trade in education and tourism is expected along with growth in tourism related investment."

There are provisions for people to reside temporally in each others countries for "research, guidance of research, or education at a university" ("Japan's Schedule of commitments for temporary entry of business persons"). 

One interesting aspect of the agreement is the mutual recognition of qualifications. "Canada's Schedule for Commitments of Temporary Entry for Business Persons" says: 

"Canadian educational requirements for professionals shall be deemed to be met for the purpose of entry whenever an Australian professional has met Australian educational requirements ..". 

However, this excludes:

"All health, education, and social services occupations and related occupations
All professional occupations related to Cultural Industries
Recreation, Sports and Fitness Program and Service Directors
Managers in Telecommunications Carriers
Managers in Postal and Courier Services
Judges and Notaries"

So an Australian teacher would not be qualified to work in Canada, but an computer programmer would.

Education
(a) Explore potential for collaborative work in curriculum development including curriculum materials;
(b) Share experiences on the use of information technology in education, including education portals;
(c) Share opportunities for professional/executive training encourage possible joint programmes between institutions; and
(d) Share experiences on language training and encourage collaborative programmes for professional development and training of language teachers, including exchanges of language teachers (English/Spanish/Chinese);
(e) Share information on opportunities available to post graduate students in each other’s countries in areas of mutual interest to each of the Parties. 

From "Implementing Arrangement: Strategic Partnership",  TPP Draft