Conference Agenda

The research question of this doctoral dissertation is: which evidence-based policy recommendations should be established for preparing the transnational basic education politics for future pandemics? This study builds on the traditions of comparative education and sociology of education, although it is not limited to educational or social sciences.

In contemporary history, the COVID-19 pandemic has been one of a kind. It is “the first disease event since the 1918–20 H1N1 Spanish influenza (flu) pandemic to demand an urgent global healthcare response, propagated by the speed and likelihood of potential transmission” (Patterson & McIntyre & Clough et al. 2021, 1). However, the existing scientific literature of transnational pandemic management in basic education is predominantly young, shallow, and disjointed – offering primarily partial views rather than systemic and systematic understanding of the broader implications. The transnational approaches are geographically, thematically, and methodologically limited and fragmented, especially considering the Global South (Wisenöcker & Helm & Große et al. 2025; Alkhnbashi & Mohammad & Bamasoud 2024, 16; Betthäuser & Bach-Mortensen & Engzell 2023, 375). Still, there is an abundance of acute and fundamental research gaps that should be addressed pedantically. This study fills a part of these gaps with transnationally comprehensive, evidence-based insights in pandemic management.

The acuteness of the research question may be described in two ways: Firstly, education is a right of the child (UNICEF 1989, article 28), whose human value is beyond replacement also during severe crises, such as pandemics. Secondly, it has been estimated that a global school shutdown of five months may “generate learning losses that have a present value of $10 trillion” (Azevedo & Hasan & Goldemberg et al. 2021, 29). Therefore, solving the research question of this study in a sustainable manner is a trillion-dollar question.

This dissertation argues that key to understand global pandemic management in education, is analysing 1) the connection between pandemic management and transnational flows of information; and 2) the potential use of pandemic management in governance by diverse political actors as a way to transform education (cf. Kauko & Takala, & Rinne 2018, 5).

The dissertation is conducted within the dynamics framework. The definition of dynamics is the following: the complexity of interactions between political institutions and actors as well as other systemic discursive formations (Kauko & Simola & Varjo et al. 2012, 214; Simola & Kauko & Varjo et al. 2017, 16). The analysis of dynamics is traditionally divided into three descriptive dimensions: the political situation, the political possibilities, and the use of political space (Kauko & Centeno & Piattoeva et al. 2018, 21). The political situation describes the structures and positions as well as changes of different political actors. The political possibilities define how the relevant actors see the potential opportunities and threats. The use of political space illustrates how the actors transform ideas stemming from the first two dimensions into action. Effectively, to understand these three descriptive dimensions, five core research themes are formed: the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic, future pandemics, actors, change dynamics, and other potential issues.

On the whole, the emphasis of this study is on holistic, normative questions of future pandemic policy recommendations. Nevertheless, socio-historical contextualisation is key in forming the policy recommendations as applicable and universalisable as possible in the real world.

Philosophically, a logically deductive path from descriptive to normative statements is all but self-evident. The is–ought problem claims that normative judgements cannot straightforwardly be deduced from descriptive statements (Hume 2019, 518–519). Therefore, the logical deduction of this study bridges a descriptive premise with normative judgements for being able to deduce a normative conclusion (cf. Singer 2015, 23; Kodelja 2013, 15–16).

In recent decades, a robust body of scholarship has examined the influence of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in shaping the global educational landscape (Chabbot 2002; Fontdevila 2023; Elfert and Ydesen 2023). Within this literature, research inspired by Social Network Analysis (SNA) and the so-called “network turn” (Hafner et al. 2009) has highlighted UNESCO’s unique capacity to structure diverse networks oriented toward the fulfillment of international educational agendas. Notable examples include the Education for All initiative (Read 2019), Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Bandola-Gill et al. 2022), and the Global Education Coalition during the COVID-19 pandemic (Saura 2020). Recently, Zapp et al. (2024, 21) characterized UNESCO as the “queen bee” around which international educational activity is organized—a position that “demonstrates UNESCO’s legitimacy and its appeal to a large number of members in the field.” In sum, academic research has identified networks as a primary mechanism through which UNESCO produces, legitimizes, and consolidates its agenda (Fuentes et al. 2025; Addey 2021).
Despite these advances, knowledge regarding UNESCO’s role as a promoter of networks within specific national systems—particularly in Global South contexts—remains notably limited (Alarcón 2015; De Raedt 2014). This gap is further deepened by a general scarcity of data on non-state actors in the Global South, a field of study largely dominated by analyses of “North/West” actors (Erfurth and Ridge 2021). This lack of attention is especially significant given that the Global South has historically been a priority area for UNESCO’s development efforts (Jones and Coleman 2005), and that, for many of these countries, the organization represents a vital “repository of knowledge and expertise for capacity building” (Sayed et al. 2022, 523).
Building on this literature, this paper analyzes the collaborative and discursive networks promoted by the UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Latin America and the Caribbean (UNESCO/OREALC) within the Chilean school system. Specifically, it examines the organizational dynamics of UNESCO/OREALC’s partnerships and the discursive transformations these collaborations have fostered in the Chilean education sector between 1990 and 2025. The Chilean case is particularly relevant for two reasons. First, since the return to democracy in 1989, the education system has maintained high levels of both endogenous and exogenous privatization, with only limited variation in its organizational model (Villalobos et al. 2025; Bellei and Muñoz 2023). Second, UNESCO has historically regarded Chile as a central hub for the production and dissemination of educational knowledge in Latin America (Alarcón 2015; Cutroni 2018). Consequently, analyzing these networks offers valuable insights into how an international organization of major relevance in the Global South shapes educational policy at the national level (Verger and Fontdevila 2024).
Conceptually, the article is situated within contemporary debates on epistemic communities in global governance. It draws on the concepts of symbolic, instrumental, and political community developed within constructivist approaches in international relations (Bueger 2015; Lacatus 2025; Seabrooke and Tsingou 2021). This perspective contends that international organizations create networks of varying scales and degrees of cohesion to promote ideas that enhance their legitimacy and political standing within specific decision-making arenas. However, in doing so, particular actors and their educational products—discourses, ideas, and solutions—can gain legitimacy and influence political trajectories (Demortain 2017).
The research questions guiding the study are: (i) What are the main characteristics of the network structure and the actors convened by UNESCO/OREALC in Chile, and how has this network evolved between 1990 and 2025? (ii) What educational discourses circulate within these networks, and how have they changed over the last 25 years? By addressing these questions, the study contributes to a more granular understanding of how global agendas are translated and institutionalized in national contexts through techno-political mediation.