Those constructing an ECCD program will undoubtedly encounter people skeptical about the value of investing in early childhood programs. So it is best to be prepared with a series of arguments providing a rationale for investment—to help bolster political commitment and the allocation of resources to early childhood care and development. This section sketches out several general lines of reasoning and argument.

1. Millions of young children in Latin America and the Caribbean, particularly those living in poverty, suffer delayed or debilitated mental, social, or emotional development in their early years, adversely affecting all of their later life.

These children are victims of social neglect. Deprived of the chance to develop their abilities adequately, they are unable to cope effectively with a rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. They are condemned to dependent, unproductive, and unrewarding lives. They often become the school dropouts, delinquents, and early pregnancy cases of tomorrow. These children—and their families and communities—need help with their development if they are to have a fair start in life.

2. Scientific research establishes the importance of promoting healthy development during the early years and shows that integrated programs focusing on ECCD help prevent developmental problems and, therefore, bring lasting benefits to individuals and society.

Evidence continues to accumulate—from physiology, nutrition, psychology, sociology, and other fields—showing that the early years are critical in the development of intelligence, personality, and social behavior. Research shows that children are born with the social, physical, and psychological capacities to learn, develop, and communicate, but if these capacities are not recognized and supported, they will wither rather than develop.

Much of the brain is already formed at birth, and most brain cell growth occurs during the first two to three years of life. The preschool years are crucial for the structuring of neural connections and definition of a child's capacities. This process is affected by a child's nutritional and health status, but also by the kind of interaction the child has with the people and things in his or her environment—the heart of ECCD programs. If the brain develops well, learning potential increases and the chances of failure in school and in life decrease. Indeed, research suggests that most of the development of intelligence occurs before age seven.

Research also shows that children who receive consistent, caring attention are better nourished, are less apt to be sick, learn better, and, later in life, develop healthier relationships than children who do not receive such care. So it should not be surprising that systematic evaluations find lasting effects from well-conceived programs to foster early development. These effects are evident in such indicators as improved school attendance and performance, decreased delinquency, and reduced pregnancy during the teenage years (for a classic study of the benefits of ECCD programs see box 1.1).

3. There are strong moral, social, political, economic, and programmatic arguments for investing in early childhood care and development.

A human rights argument. Children have a right to live and to develop to their full potential. This right is set forth in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which has been signed by all countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (see Himes 1995).

An economic argument. Society benefits economically from investing in early childhood care and development, through higher productivity and through cost savings (see box 1.2).

Box 1.2  Economic evidence for investing in early childcare and development Ample scientific literature links improvements in schooling and learning to increased employment and economic productivity. But even common sense suggests that a person who is well developed physically, mentally, socially, and emotionally will be better able to be employed and to contribute economically to family, community, and country than a person who is not well developed. Common sense also suggests that early preventive efforts will result in later cost savings. Following is evidence from the literature confirming these common sense ideas. Economic productivity and employment Linking early childhood interventions to later economic productivity and employment involves tracing a chain of relationships. First, comparisons of similar children have shown that those who have participated in preschool programs demonstrate improved preparedness for school, in terms of gains in physical growth and mental capacities, than those who have not. These preschool gains lead to increased enrollment and to improved progress and performance in school (see the review of 19 longitudinal studies in Myers 1992a or the classic High/Scope Perry Preschool Study reported in Schweinhart and others 1993; also see Mcguire and Austin 1987). Second, we know that schooling is associated with important changes in outlook affecting adult behavior (see for example Inkeles and Smith 1974). We also know that schooling helps build such skills as the ability to organize knowledge into meaningful categories, to transfer knowledge from one situation to another, and to be selective in the use of information (Rogoff 1980; Triandis 1980). Schooling helps develop the ability to adapt to new technology (Grawe 1979). And it is directly linked to increased productivity by both farmers and informal sector workers (Lockheed, Jamison, and Lau 1980; Colclough 1980). This chain traces the effect of early interventions on adult productivity. Investment in early education programs can yield productivity increases for the society beyond those resulting from changes in the child. Early childhood education programs are often also child care programs, permitting increased labor force participation by women and freeing older siblings (usually girls) to learn and earn at a higher level. By contrast, women without access to child care are often unable to consider more economically productive employment outside the home because of their child care responsibilities. An evaluation of the Colombian home day care program Hogares de Cuidado Diario shows that it enabled 20 percent of the women with children participating in the program to change their employment status (Ortiz and others 1992). Cost-benefit calculations and cost savings Although rarely attempted, cost-benefit calculations indicate a potentially high rate of return to investments in early childhood. Marcelo Selowsky, using Chilean data, concluded that "yearly investments per child in programs that can induce a change in ability equal to one standard deviation can be 'justified' if they cost between 0.37 and 0.51 times the yearly wage of an illiterate worker" (1981, p. 342). Such changes in ability can be reasonably expected from early education programs. Data from the High/Scope Perry Preschool Study in the United States suggest that the returns on a preschool investment can be sevenfold (Schweinhart and others 1993). This finding was based on estimates of cost savings associated with reductions in crime, in the need for remedial education programs, and in the need for other social programs. Participation in early childhood programs also leads to cost savings in at least three other ways. It reduces inefficiencies in school systems by lowering repetition and dropout rates (see Myers 1992b and the evaluation of PROAPE in Brazil in Ministerio da Saude 1983). It reduces work losses by ensuring that children are well taken care of, so that parents have less need to take time off from work (Galinsky 1986). And it reduces health care costs through the preventive measures introduced in good care and education (Evans 1993).

A social equity argument. In a vicious circle, children from poor families often fall quickly and progressively further behind their more advantaged peers in mental development and readiness for school and life, and that gap never closes. Research in Chile shows poverty-related differences in psychomotor development emerging clearly by 18 months and then increasing, so that 40 percent of all children from poor families show delays in development by age five. The inequalities in early development and learning that accompany poverty maintain or magnify economic and social inequalities. Early child development programs, by providing a fair start to children, can moderate these social and economic inequalities.

Ironically, an argument sometimes used against early education programs is that they discriminate in favor of the upper class. That can certainly be true if no special effort is made to direct programs to the poor or if programs are open only to those who can pay for them. But it is not true if programs are carefully directed toward those most in need.

A gender equity argument.ECCD programs can moderate gender inequality by providing a fair start to girls as well as to boys and by helping parents to better perceive the girl child's capabilities, leading to longer schooling for girls. They can also provide a place where gender stereotypes can be modified. In addition, by providing child care, programs can free many women (and young girls) from their full-time child care responsibilities so that they can earn and learn.

A moral and social values argument. Humanity transmits its values through children. Thus efforts to build and preserve moral and social values must begin with children. Early childhood programs can aid this process by strengthening parents' resolve and by providing environments for children to play and learn that give specific attention to values. Attending to the development of basic values must be a high priority in a world racked by violence but seeking peace, in a world facing environmental degradation but seeking cooperative and sane solutions, and in a world where consumerism competition, and individualism seem to be winning out over altruism, cooperation, and solidarity.

Children provide a rallying point for social and political actions that build consensus and solidarity. People are often willing to cooperate in building a better world or their children in ways that they would be unwilling to cooperate on other, more politically charged issues. Moreover, an investment in ECCD programs is an investment in a more educated citizenry. In form and content, most child development programs lend themselves to producing the traits considered essential to democracy—even more so than most primary schooling. While primary schooling tends to be characterized by an unquestioning "frontal" method of imparting knowledge and an essentially authoritarian relationship between teacher and child, most preschool programs are based on the premise that a child learns best by doing and exploring and questioning.

So the care and development of children during their early years turns out to be crucial—whether a human rights perspective is taken as the starting point, or social and economic equity, or economic productivity, or social costs, or the transmission of values, or social mobilization, or the strengthening of a democratic state. Taken together, and combined with the scientific evidence, these reasons constitute a powerful rationale for action. The main question for education policymakers today is not so much whether investments should be made in early education, but how to invest so that programs will be effective in producing these economic, social, and political benefits, yet also be efficient and affordable.

4. Need and demand are increasing for programs of early childhood care and development.

• This is so because changing social, economic, and demographic conditions are requiring greater attention to early childhood.
• Increases in infant survival rates mean that more children are now at risk of social neglect and its effects on their development.
• Rapid migration and urbanization and dislocations of war and civil strife disrupt stable family units, erode traditional, healthy, child rearing practices, and make adopting new practices appropriate to new settings difficult.
• Revolutions in transportation, communication, and education have extended the city's reach into rural areas, bringing changes in values and practices. Confusion about what is "right" has led to premature abandonment of time-tested, culturally appropriate practices of child care, and children increasingly are suffering the effects of this confusion.
• The often dramatic rise in women's participation in the paid labor force, combined with shifts in family structures (toward nuclear families or female-headed households), increase the need and demand for alternative forms of child care in both urban and rural areas.
• Poverty is high throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, exacerbating problems of early childhood development as many families living at the margin struggle just to survive.
• Countries shifting to open economies need a well-educated and flexible labor force to compete globally.

5. Our knowledge—scientific and practical—about how to foster healthy and holistic child development is sufficient to serve as a basis for action.

The state of the art. Enough scientific knowledge has accumulated so that we need not wait for more answers from further research. Indeed, the "state of the art" seems to be ahead of "the state of the practice" in many respects. Waiting for more answers would deprive today's children of the sound assistance to which they are entitled.

The state of the practice. Program experience has also accumulated, providing a range of potentially effective and financially feasible options that can be adapted to local circumstances. These options include programs of home-based support and education for parents (home visiting, adult education, mass media programs, child-to-child programs), programs of center-based care and education (crèches, kindergartens, play groups, home day care, formal and nonformal preschools, child care centers in the workplace), and broad child-centered community development programs.

Experience with large-scale programs. Many ECCD programs have now gone well beyond a demonstration or pilot phase—such as the parental education program in Cuba, the home day care system in Colombia, the nonformal preschools of Peru, and the multisectoral, multi-institutional approach in Chile. All these provide us with lessons of practical experience.

6. Costs need not be exorbitant to produce results, and costs can be shared by governments, communities, and the private sector under a variety of arrangements. Programs can be created at a relatively low cost, yet still be effective. Often an ECCD component can be folded into an existing program at a small cost. Focusing (targeting) programs can also keep costs down. And the cost savings produced by ECCD programs can moderate or even offset the programs' investment costs (see box 1.2 and tab 5). A variety of innovative financing schemes and cost sharing arrangements are possible.

In most countries the investment in early childhood care and development is so low that even small increases would allow major extensions and improvements of programs. Moreover, several countries with low per capita incomes have developed sizable programs, suggesting that if a country believes the investment is a good one and there is political will, it can find the relatively modest amounts needed to give a big push to early childhood development.