Building High-Quality Educational Equity in China: Governance Lessons from International Models

The ADB-led report finds that China’s compulsory education system has largely secured universal access and strong national guarantees but still faces persistent regional and social inequities. Drawing on international experience, it argues that refining China’s hybrid governance model, rather than undertaking radical reform is the most effective path to achieving high-quality, equitable education that supports long-term innovation and development.

Prepared by the Asian Development Bank in partnership with China’s National Development and Reform Commission, and drawing on comparative evidence from institutions such as the OECD, UNESCO, the World Intellectual Property Organization, and national education authorities in France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the December 2025 report Advancing High-Quality and Equitable Development of Compulsory Education in the People’s Republic of China situates China’s school system at a pivotal juncture. It frames compulsory education not only as a legal right guaranteed by the state but also as a strategic investment in human capital, innovation capacity, and long-term economic resilience, aligning education reform with China’s broader shift toward high-quality, inclusive development.

From Universal Access to High-Quality Equity

The report underscores how China’s compulsory education has moved beyond the historic task of universal access. With nationwide nine-year compulsory schooling achieved and county-level balanced development completed by 2021, policy attention has turned to “high-quality equity.” Central planning documents such as Education Modernization 2035 and subsequent State Council opinions emphasize learning quality, fairness across regions and social groups, and system sustainability. Large and rising fiscal commitments have improved school infrastructure, teacher deployment, and learning outcomes, with international assessments increasingly placing Chinese students near the global frontier. Yet the report is candid in noting that deep-seated disparities remain between urban and rural areas, across regions, and among schools, reflecting broader economic and institutional differences.

Three Principles Shaping Modern Compulsory Education

At the analytical core of the report are three interlinked principles, guarantee, equity, and efficiency, used to understand compulsory education’s complex nature. Guarantee refers to the state’s capacity to translate legal entitlements into stable, adequately funded education services, even amid economic volatility. Equity focuses on how fairly resources and opportunities are distributed, recognizing that fairness implies balanced, context-sensitive allocation rather than uniformity. Efficiency examines how effectively educational inputs generate outcomes, especially long-term skills and innovation. Together, these principles capture compulsory education’s dual role as a social right and a long-term investment, and they structure both the comparative and empirical analyses that follow.

Lessons from Global Models of Governance

Using five innovation-leading economies as benchmarks, the report distinguishes among centralized, decentralized, and hybrid governance models. France’s centralized system excels at guarantee through uniform standards and strong national financing. Germany and the United States, representing decentralized models, demonstrate higher efficiency and innovation driven by local autonomy, but also larger disparities linked to regional fiscal capacity. Japan and the United Kingdom exemplify hybrid governance, combining strong national frameworks with meaningful local discretion, and achieving comparatively balanced outcomes across guarantee, equity, and efficiency. These contrasts show that no single model dominates across all dimensions; each involves trade-offs shaped by political structure, fiscal design, and social context.

China’s Path Forward: Refinement over Reinvention

China’s compulsory education system aligns most closely with the hybrid model. The central government sets minimum standards and policy direction, while local governments manage implementation and service delivery. Empirical indicators suggest that China performs solidly on guarantee and efficiency, comparable to Japan and the United Kingdom, but lags on equity due to persistent regional disparities. Rather than recommending a sweeping institutional overhaul, the report advocates incremental reform: prioritizing intra-regional equity in the short term and interregional balance over time; strengthening hierarchical co-guarantee mechanisms that blend national standards with local flexibility; and improving coordination between general and vocational education to support labor market needs, technological change, and green development. The overarching conclusion is pragmatic and forward-looking: by refining its existing hybrid system rather than replacing it, China can continue advancing toward a compulsory education model that supports social equity, economic transformation, and long-term national competitiveness within a rapidly evolving global environment.