Press enter to see results or esc to cancel.

Order and Progress: Education Spending in Brazil

I’ve been wondering about the extent to which Brazil, as a country and as a people, values public education. In my casual reading, I’ve come across suggestions that wealthy Brazilians are unenthusiastic about public education and therefore send their children to private schools and use their influence to minimize public funding. I’ve also encountered the claim that Brazilians recognize the importance of education and have funded it generously, at least as much as possible given the limited resources of the country compared to the severity of needs. I’m hoping soon to have a better on-the-ground understanding both of citizen opinions and government policies, but for now have contented myself with some of the macro-numbers.

According to the World Bank, in 2015 Brazil spent 6.2% of its GDP on education, well above the world average of 4.8% and also comfortably above the United States (5%). Note, however, that the recent spending resulted from a steep increase over the last twenty years:

For a reason I’m still looking into at the time this post goes live, the US data only spans four years, but is more or less flat:

The UK numbers reach farther back and tell a more volatile tale; I would guess the swinging of the political pendulum has made planning very difficult indeed for British school leaders:

Now have a look at just secondary spending for Brazil, as a percentage of GDP per capita:

Again, this number of just below 22% is above the world average and slightly above the US’s expenditure.

In absolute terms, the US spends about 3.5 times as much per student as Brazil.

For this reason, a lay observer could visit a crumbing urban school in Rio or a makeshift outdoor classroom in the northeast and conclude that Brazil underfunds education, delaying the march of order and progress. This observation of course oversimplifies the matter, as competing demands for funding–infrastructure, trade, development of diverse industries–could themselves lead to a larger pie to divide.