What had been lacking altogether (especially up to 2014), however, was a distinctly Cambodian outlook on the ultimate goal of higher education. Several researchers have observed that the ESPs have been greatly influenced by outsiders as reflected in the overwhelming presence of foreign consultants and advisors. No less than 19.5–27.34 percent of the total budget for reforming education has been allocated to “technical assistance”, for example (Un, 2012). Even if this technical assistance was suspected of being unnecessary or dysfunctional, Cambodia did not refuse it, leading to a proliferation of ill-informed foreign consultants visiting on short-term contracts (Un, 2012). Taking the neo-liberal development discourse for granted, these consultants principally focused on issues surrounding technical implementa- tion, leaving fundamental questions concerning the raison d’être of (higher) education in Cambodia untouched. Since this international development agenda and strategy were well received by a majority of technocrats and politicians, it has dominated Cambodian educational policy-making and goes unquestioned. Educational reform on the ground has been derived directly from these ideological premises.

Fundamental questions concerning social justice and the public good are hence not addressed. There is, however, a real urgency for these questions to be taken up. While Cambodia has experienced tremendous economic growth (7 percent on average), the issue of inequality is growing fast. Economic progress thus far is gearing towards a small proportion of society including foreigners and foreign companies, rather than the majority of the Cambodian population. Although the percentage of people living below the poverty line has been reduced substantially during the last two decades, in absolute terms the number of people living under the poverty line is only marginally less. In addition, by leaving higher education to the private market, those who are poor do not have access to quality schooling and will remain disadvantaged. In order to curb these trends, it is imperative for Cambodia to develop its own critical development discourse. Instead of focusing mainly on the“how”, Cambodian higher education should occupy itself with the “what”. What is education for? For whom? Who decides?

It is only recently that policy ownership has become more prominent on the political and policy agenda. Acknowledging the need to improve Cambodia’s low productivity to increase economic growth and development, thus trickling down to the rest of the popula- tion, the government has committed itself to strengthening and expanding the population’s technical skills. The specifics as to what technical skills are needed remain under-defined, however. Also, recently, the goal of higher education has been made more balanced, with the passage of the Higher Education Vision 2030 in 2014 and the Cambodian Higher Education Roadmap 2030 and Beyond in 2017. These two policies aim to gear contribution from higher education towards not only attaining economic growth, but also achieving broader national development.

However, the government budget is too limited to invest in such a mission. Support from foreign institutions have often hampered rather than supported the development of such a discourse. Programmes by the World Bank and Asian Development Bank, for example, have strongly contributed to the dominance of a neo-liberal development discourse within Cambodian higher education. Donors suggest reforming only areas such as “governance and finance” and “autonomy and accountability”, as Cambodian higher education produce qualified graduates to fulfil its unrealised industrial and capitalist potential, thus bringing about development. It is our belief, however, that such reforms could miss the mark. While privatisation, governance reform and financial transparency are all needed, they should above all be seen as means within a broader social-progress discourse. Changes in governance and finance are changes advocated by the reform agenda, but they do not constitute deep and foun- dational change in terms of educational discourse. Especially until 2014, educational policy was made without adequately heeding the Cambodian context and taking adequate account as to how it impacts Cambodian society. We maintain, however, that one of the primary goals of higher education in Cambodia should be to facili- tate societal debate. Instead of taking the neo-liberal development discourse for granted, Cambodian higher education has to give shape to a proper Cambodian social-progress discourse. It can only do so, however, if both donors and Cambodians themselves develop a different understanding of the role of higher education within the Cambodian society.