Most South Asian governments have yet to be convinced that investing in quality care of mothers as well as by mothers (Ramalingaswami, Jonsson and Rohde 1996, p.15) costs a family and society much less in the longer term than later remedial services, and there is a ‘mismatch’ between opportunity and investment (Perry 1966). Although the ability to influence the developing brain is greatest in the unborn child and during the early years, direct government support to young families is trivial, compared to later government investments in education, remedial services, hospitals, courts, prisons, and social welfare services (McCain and Mustard 1999, pp.122-123).

In the world of investment, the longer the time In the world of investment, the longer the time and the larger the distance between a decision to invest and the effect of that investment, the harder it is to get the investment (Doryan, Gautam and Foege 2002, p. 379). When it takes a long time to get a ‘return’ on an ‘investment’, other options that have a faster ‘pay-back’ are preferred. ECD is hard to ‘sell’ to governments as a good investment, partly because some of the most important effects are not observable for many years.

The Aga Khan University Symposium: September 2002
How are early childhood care and development, human capital formation and national development linked? Does it make good economic sense to invest in the care of women and children? Who should invest in ECD? Who benefits? A large number of national and international speakers and papers addressed this theme: ECCD: Best Investment for the Future in the 2002 Aga Khan University, Faculty of Health Sciences Symposium. A number of papers, posters, workshops and plenary discussions combined to reinforce their messages.