The global education sector continues to endure a tumultuous period of diminishing funding and resource allocation, as competing priorities such as health, humanitarian aid and other social services require urgent financial responses from the international community. Although most education needs are financed domestically, international goal-setting and funding have supported lower-middle income countries in prioritising primary and secondary levels of education. However, funding needs for higher education have not received as much importance. Robust tertiary education is indispensable in creating effective institutions, capacity building and long-term self-reliance in emerging economies like Bangladesh. This is why international aid in the education sector needs to prioritise higher education.

There are many reasons why higher education finance has a narrow scope in the international aid architecture, as well as in domestic budgets. The impact of higher education is realised in the long run and thus, tangible returns on investment are difficult to measure. Therefore, investment in education as part of aid is incongruous, as the goal of many aid initiatives is to make quick and short-term changes. International education finance has mainly been geared towards producing outcomes that would meet the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as that of donor countries or organisations. The development agenda setting work for lower-middle income countries is often led by donor priorities, and Bangladesh's education sector is no exception. Thus, the financing initiatives are performance-based and seldom needs-based.

Primary level education preoccupies much of international education aid allocations because of global community interests, and also because of the ease with which the impacts of investment can be measured. Article 26 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights states basic education as a fundamental human right and public good, yet the next declaration states that "higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit." This merit-based framing of higher education exposes the sector more to market forces and makes it less of a public responsibility. The aspect of education as a fundamental human right is dimmed for higher education as access is not only merit-based—academic excellence is often determined by life opportunities and family wealth.

Furthermore, the opportunity cost of being in school for longer, immediate labour market needs of a developing economy, the need to address primary and secondary levels of education to ensure that there are students educated and interested enough to pursue higher education, and the development stages of the national economy—all of these factors limit the prospects of international aid for higher education. Student and teacher performance assessments at primary and secondary school levels are also more standardised and have easily identifiable quantitative metrics. Therefore, it may be easier to make outcome-based funding decisions for lower levels of education. Global education policy architects like the World Bank drive international aid agendas and their evaluation of education program efficacy from the 1980s still inform much of spending patterns and priorities. The World Bank studies concluded that investment in primary education produces more social capital for youth than investments in higher education, thus only a slim 2.7 percent of the international development budget goes towards higher education.

Priorities of international development partners can also map onto domestic expenditure patterns for education. In the latest national budget of Bangladesh, 11.9 percent has been allocated to education expenditure. The domestic expenditure allocation for primary education has its own separate category in the budget, but budgets for secondary and higher education are merged. As much as Global South governments rejoice in the success of higher enrolment rates at the primary level, this success story overlooks issues of finance limiting the education system's ability to retain students, and improve quality of learning.

Student retention in the education system is essential for higher education. Furthermore, returns on primary education are limited unless high-quality higher education is financed, as returns on investment are lower for workers who only have primary education in capital-poor countries.  Building higher education infrastructure will make countries self-reliant, as universities are also research institutions. Having better higher education options in the country may help in preventing more brain drain and support university graduates to meet the high skills demands for job positions that remain unfilled. The dearth of international aid and investment in higher education also speaks to the persistent issues of low skilled labour and large-scale international migration, leading to a Bangladeshi diasporic labour market catering to cross-border informal economies. International education finance initiatives continue to prioritise primary and secondary levels of education without taking into account the growth aspirations of lower middle-income countries. Global aid expenditure needs to focus on higher education institutions, since investment in robust research infrastructure at university levels would have trickle-down effects on other levels of education and make aid recipient countries self-reliant.

Another key rationale for prioritising international donor investment in higher education is that such investment would have a more direct impact on improving the recipient country's institutions and systems-level policies. Research on aid effectiveness has shown that international aid's impact on economic growth depends on the recipient country's institutions and policies. Post-secondary education funding needs to be emphasised for Bangladesh to build stronger institutions and to reap the benefits of international aid in other sectors. Producing self-reliant and stronger national institutions will also provide Bangladesh with leverage in negotiations with bilateral and multilateral aid providers. Having strong tertiary institutions will enable the local leadership to establish national systems of coordination involving international donors. The partnership framework espoused by the World Bank to strategise Bangladesh's growth emphasises on building human and social capital. The role of robust higher education infrastructure is integral in capacity building and creating a reliable service sector to meet this development goal.

While there are partnership-based initiatives such as the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) and Education Cannot Wait (ECW) to prioritise basic quality education, there is a need for greater collaboration between donors and recipients of international aid in financing higher education, and this could start from engaging international donors with the University Grants Commission. Large education donors, such as Germany, continue to spend the bulk of their higher education aid on scholarships for international students from emerging economies to study at German universities. However, universities at home need to be strengthened and transformed into stronger teaching and research institutions. Donor countries, through bilateral and multilateral arrangements, have multiple international aid delivery mechanisms to meet education needs. Creative financing models through establishing foundations such as the Asian University for Women Foundation can guarantee effective ways of engaging the global private sector in financing higher education for marginalised communities.

The effect of having robust higher education can be reflected in teaching improvement, more opportunities for professional development and for young adults to have a meaningful and holistic learning experience. Centering education in the international aid architecture with a focus on higher education is thereby, a genuine step towards allowing recipient countries to develop human capital and be self-reliant.

Sarzah Yeasmin is a Boston-based Bangladeshi writer and graduate student studying education policy at Harvard University. She is a program coordinator for the university's innovations in government program.