Education as a dimension of human development: A Provincial-level Education Index for Ecuador

between 2004 and 2007, introduced a program of free schoolbooks: Sí a la Educación Básica (Sílabas). Since 2006, this program has also been in place in the provinces of Azuay and Man- abı´. In Guayas, the Más Libros program is still being implemented today [110, 116]. Finally, the effects of the Bono de Desarrollo Humano (BDH) must also be considered. Most of the studies which assess the impact of CCT programs in LAC countries report significant effects in the increase of school enrolment and in the reduction in child labor. This is the case of some research conducted in countries with upper-middle income in the region, the results of which reflect the positive effects that these programs have on school attendance and enrol- ment, as occurred in Oportunidades (formerly Progresa) in Mexico [117, 118], Familias en Acción in Colombia [119] or Bolsa Escola in Brazil [120]. In Ecuador, BDH’s achievements have been highlighted by studies that find significant effects in the reduction of activity and child labor rates, delaying children’s entry into the labor force [121]. This conclusion is sup- ported by the fact that such transfers considerably increase school enrollment, and that this effect is four times greater in households that perceive this conditionality as an obligation com- pared to those who feel that the transfer is not conditional [122]. During 2009–2014, the BDH had greater coverage in some of the provinces where the education index shows a clear improvement −such as Esmeraldas, Loja, Morona Santiago,

Tungurahua, and Zamora Chinchipe−. The beneficiaries’ fear of being sanctioned in the event of a verification of conditionality in education has probably contributed to the results achieved [123]. Finally, it is worth mentioning that, even though no cause-effect relation may be inferred from our study, the convergence in educational development of Ecuadorian provinces is con- sistent with studies that point to a process of income convergence at a provincial level in Ecua- dor in the period covered in this research, and which underpin the importance of reducing inequalities in education in order to achieve such a convergence [45,124, 125]. In spite of this, the convergence in education obtained should be considered with the cau- tion that the lack of representativeness of the Amazonian provinces in the fifth round of the LSMS implies. In line with certain authors who consider that a sample can be valid without being representative [126, 127] our analysis of the causes behind the results obtained will bring us closer to the scientific objective of understanding the territorial dynamics of educational development in the Ecuadorian provinces. In any case, the main limitation in our work is the lack of data. The fact that the latest available round of the LSMS corresponds to the period 2013–2014 does not −for the time being− allow us to analyze the consequences of Ecuador’s educational policies with a greater perspective, particularly if we consider that the outcomes of educational policies do not tend to emerge in the short term. In a similar vein, the LSMS’s lack

of representativeness for a higher level of disaggregation (Ecuadorian cantons) prevented us from delving more deeply into the dynamics of educational inequalities in Ecuador. We are also aware that using only two indicators is perhaps a reductionist way of understanding a country’s educational development. Nevertheless, the fact that they are the indicators used by the UNDP allows our technique to be used for drawing comparisons, such as those made in this work between the educational development of the Ecuadorian provinces and that of the upper-middle income LAC countries. It should also be noted that the use of the mean years of schooling variable in the comparison of educational development between countries has been criticized by several authors [9, 128]. The reason lies in the errors that can occur in the inter- pretation of the results due to the existing heterogeneity between countries’ educational sys- tems. However, this criticism does not make sense in this work, since the PEI is calculated for provinces that have the same educational system. Finally, although the LSMS did allow for the estimation of the education indicators used in this research, the results must be analyzed with the due caution required for a study that is based on the use of a survey. PLOS ONE Education as a dimension of Human development PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270932 July 8, 2022 19 / 27