Vanishing Zero

I. COUNTING ZERO PHE 

Whereas our N for dataset computations is usually 192, for Vanishing Zero calculations it is 179; why? For most computations, the 13 cases (not showing whether there is private while showing total enrollment) are dwarfed by the 179 cases which do show both sectors and so inclusion of the 13 understates the private share for the 192 only slightly (as shown in the PROPHE Dataset Development). When it comes to counting the number of zero PHE cases, however, the 13 unknowns weigh too heavily against our known 10 cases of zero PHE; anywhere from 0 to 13 of the 13 might have PHE, too rangy an uncertainty. It is much preferable to compute reliably 10/179.[1]

Table 1. PHE’s Vanishing Zero

Relevant Category	Number of Cases
Total number of countries with data	192 (18 countries of the total 210 in the dataset are NA)
Zero PHE shown for country in dataset	24 (11 of which are only very small systems)
PROPHE considers as still TRULY Zero PHE	10 (out of 24)

 

II. CATEGORIZATION & INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES BY REGION 

1. Zero PHE. We know that the following countries have zero PHE: Algeria, Bhutan, Cuba, Djibouti, Eritrea, Greece, Luxembourg, Myanmar, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Among these Bhutan, Djibouti and Luxembourg are very small.

2. UIS shows as zero for 2010 dataset and PROPHE follows suit in its tables but we know that 14 of the 24 in fact have operating degree-granting PHE. Inclusion as zero in the dataset means that we underestimate PHE, albeit only slightly at the global or regional levels. but we properly count the real number of countries with no PHE as just 10.

Table 2. Countries with 0 PHE in 2010 Dataset by Region and System Size

Region	Country	System Size
Africa
	Eritrea *	Small
	Sierra Leone	Small
	Swaziland	Very Small
Arab States
	Algeria *	Large
	Djibouti *	Very Small
	Mauritania	Small
Asia
	Bhutan *	Very Small
	Myanmar *	Medium
	Palau	Very Small
	Samoa	Very Small
	Sri Lanka	Small
	Tajikistan	Small
	Turkmenistan *	Small
	Uzbekistan *	Small
Europe
	Andorra	Very Small
	Greece *	Medium
	Luxembourg *	Very Small
	Malta	Small
Latin America and the Caribbean
	Barbados	Small
	Bermuda	Very Small
	British Virgin Islands	Very Small
	Cayman Islands	Very Small
	Cuba *	Medium
	Guyana	Very Small

Note: The 10 systems marked with (*) are the only ones PROPHE counts for its list of countries with still Zero PHE.

Table 3. Vanishing 0 PHE 2000-2010

No.	Country	Region	System Size	Private % 2010	Private % 2000
1.	Cape Verde	Africa	Small	60.1	0
2.	Central African Republic	Africa	Small	14.2	0
3.	Comoros	Africa	Very Small	23.3	0
4.	Gambia	Africa	Very Small	81.1	0
5.	Lesotho	Africa	Small	13.7	0
6.	Malawi	Africa	Small	5.8	0
7.	Syrian Arab Republic	Arab States	Medium	6.0	0
8.	Tunisia	Arab States	Medium	3.4	0
9.	Afghanistan	Asia	Small	16.5	0
10.	Brunei Darussalam	Asia	Very Small	0.8	0
11.	Albania	Europe	Small	19.1	0
12.	Anguilla	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	81.5	0
13.	Montserrat	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	100	0
14.	Trinidad and Tobago	Latin America and the Caribbean	Small	10.0	0
15.	Turks and Caicos Islands	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	100	0
16.	Eritrea	Africa	Small	0	0
17.	Sierra Leone	Africa	Small	0	0
18.	Swaziland	Africa	Very Small	0	0
19.	Algeria	Arab States	Large	0	0
20.	Djibouti	Arab States	Very Small	0	0
21.	Mauritania	Arab States	Small	0	0
22.	Bhutan	Asia	Very Small	0	0
23.	Myanmar	Asia	Medium	0	0
24.	Palau	Asia	Very Small	0	0
25.	Samoa	Asia	Very Small	0	0
26.	Sri Lanka	Asia	Small	0	0
27.	Tajikistan	Asia	Small	0	0
28.	Turkmenistan	Asia	Small	0	0
29.	Uzbekistan	Asia	Small	0	0
30.	Andorra	Europe	Very Small	0	0
31.	Greece	Europe	Medium	0	0
32.	Luxembourg	Europe	Very Small	0	0
33.	Malta	Europe	Small	0	0
34.	Barbados	Latin America and the Caribbean	Small	0	0
35.	Bermuda	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	0	0
36.	British Virgin Islands	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	0	0
37.	Cayman Islands	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	0	0
38.	Cuba	Latin America and the Caribbean	Medium	0	0
39.	Guyana	Latin America and the Caribbean	Very Small	0	0

 

III. INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY NOTES

The 10 countries marked with * are still considered as Zero PHE.

1. Algeria.* Algeria remains one of the few most important cases of 0 PHE, the largest case, faithful to French colonial roots. By 2014, however, concrete proposals were submitted to found private universities.
2. Barbados. Although we enter the UIS’s 0% private, we know that there is PHE in Barbados. Indeed the Barbados Accreditation Council lists 25 “post-secondary/tertiary education and training providers” but the list fails to include enrollment data. All we can say is that the private share is small, surely under 10% and probably under 5% of the undergraduate level.
3. Bhutan.* We put PHE enrollment for Bhutan as 0 because UIS showed 0 PHE enrollment in 2008. Bhutan remains without PHE, though now establishment of PHE is very much discussed.
4. Cuba.* Cuba remains one of the two most striking global examples of 0 PHE and it remains so quite by design. Algerian higher education, the second case, is substantially larger but it appears on the verge of establishing PHE.
5. Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) remains among those countries that UIS and PROPHE show with zero private enrollment or NA but PROPHE does not count it on its list of countries without PHE. The Pyongyang University of Science and Technology (PUST), founded by evangelical Christians, opened in 2010, and is officially private, whatever that could possibly mean in North Korea (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-texas-northkorea-university-idUSKBN15E2JE). For all years we show we stick with the UIS NA. Note that UIS newly released data in 2017 show total enrollment for 2009, 2011, and 2015 respectively as 593,179; 600,424; and 565,350.
6. Djibouti.* Higher education lists show only the University of Djibouti, which is public.
7. Eritrea.* broke away from Ethiopia in the early 1990s. According to NOKUT (2013), the SMAP Institute of Training, Education and Consultancy is a small degree-granting college opened in 2005 offers bachelor degrees as well as diplomas. Also functioning is British International Institute but through a branch institute. 
8. Greece.* Greece remains listed as 0 PHE and that continues to be consistent with national legislation.
9. Luxembourg.* remains listed as 0, though it is not clear whether some enrollment should be government-dependent private. In any case, the country’s total higher education enrollment is in our very small category, under 10,000.
10. Mauritania. Although UIS still shows 0 PHE in Mauritania in 2013, several PHE institutions have been created recently (Sawahel, 2015).
11. Myanmar* remains without PHE, though now its establishment is very much discussed.
12. Sierra Leone. Some reports indicate as many as 24 private institutions operating by 2011 vs 0 in 2004, an authorizing act issued in 2005, but no institution was yet registered with the Tertiary Education Commission. There is also word of one private “university” and with an estimate of 3,758 or 15% of enrollment.
13. Tajikistan. UIS shows that Tajikistan has recently established PHE, though we maintain the UIS’ zero for 2000, 2005, and 2010. PHE is very limited, tottering on a political-legal edge (Hasanova, 2010).
14. Turkmenistan.* UIS shows no higher education data, and though we read of the private International Turkman-Turkish University, Tursunkulova (2005) says there is no PHE. In any case the one private institution was shut down in 2016. (http://catoday.org/centrasia/28461-v-ashhabade-zakryli-mezhdunarodnyy-turkmeno-tureckiy-universitet.html). PROPHE’s dataset maintains the UIS zero.
15. Uzbekistan.* Tursunkulova (2005) says there is de facto as opposed to legally recognized PHE. Westminster International University in Tashkent is a cross-border institution and degrees are validated by Westminster. As of at least 2012 there was still no domestic PHE, though 1997 legislation permits it (World Bank, 2014).