The share of boys enrolled in pre-primary education who attend public institutions is a measure of how provision is divided by institution type. It is easy to misread this indicator. A value of 51% does not mean that 51% of children in public pre-primary schools are boys. It means that, among male enrolment in pre-primary education, about 51% is recorded in public institutions.
The 2024 UNESCO Institute for Statistics observations available here cover 84 countries and territories. Their mean is 51.29% and their median is 51.14%, so the center of the distribution sits very close to one half. Yet the full spread is much wider: the lowest observation is 33.33% and the highest is 74.22%. The useful story is therefore not a simple ranking. Most observations cluster tightly near 50%, while a small number sit far above or below that central band.
Table of Contents
What the indicator measures
UIS labels the series ETOIP.02.PU.M as “Percentage of enrolment in pre-primary education in public institutions, male (%)”. The relevant population is male enrolment at the pre-primary level, and the percentage identifies the public-institution portion of that enrolment. Higher values indicate that public providers account for a larger share of enrolled boys at this education level; lower values indicate a smaller public share.
This should not be treated as a pre-primary participation rate. A country can have a high public share while still having a low overall participation rate, or a lower public share while enrolling a large proportion of the eligible population through other institution types. The series also says nothing by itself about tuition, teaching quality, class size, staffing, subsidies, or whether pre-primary education is free or compulsory.
Most 2024 observations sit close to 50 percent
The strongest feature of the data is the narrow middle of the distribution. The first quartile is 50.35% and the third quartile is 51.83%. That means the middle half of all 84 observations fits inside a band only about 1.48 percentage points wide. The median of 51.14% is also close to the mean of 51.29%, showing that the typical observation is not far from an even split around the halfway mark.
Sixty-nine observations are at or above 50%, while 15 are below 50%. Only two reach 60% or more, and only three fall below 45%. Those counts matter because the minimum and maximum alone can make the distribution look more polarized than it really is. For most of the reported countries and territories, the public share of male pre-primary enrolment is clustered in the low 50s.
| Measure | 2024 result |
|---|---|
| Reported countries and territories | 84 |
| Mean | 51.29% |
| Median | 51.14% |
| First quartile | 50.35% |
| Third quartile | 51.83% |
| Minimum | 33.33% |
| Maximum | 74.22% |
| At or above 50% | 69 observations |
| Below 50% | 15 observations |
The highest and lowest reported shares
Hong Kong SAR, China has the highest 2024 observation at 74.22%. Maldives follows at 67.49%. The next values drop below 60%: Uzbekistan records 58.88%, Cayman Islands 58.73%, and South Sudan 55.84%. The gap between the second and third positions is notable because it separates two unusually high observations from the broader upper tail.
At the lower end, Niue records 33.33% and Cook Islands 37.55%. The United Arab Emirates is at 43.45%, followed by Senegal at 46.75% and Qatar at 47.33%. These values show that the public share can differ substantially across education systems. They do not, however, establish that one system performs better than another. A lower public share can coexist with broad access if non-public institutions provide a large part of the service, while a high public share does not guarantee universal access.
| Higher observations | Public share | Lower observations | Public share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong SAR, China | 74.22% | Niue | 33.33% |
| Maldives | 67.49% | Cook Islands | 37.55% |
| Uzbekistan | 58.88% | United Arab Emirates | 43.45% |
| Cayman Islands | 58.73% | Senegal | 46.75% |
| South Sudan | 55.84% | Qatar | 47.33% |
Why tiny differences around 50 percent should not be overinterpreted
Several observations are almost exactly at 50%. Mauritius is 50.02%, Saudi Arabia 50.08%, El Salvador 50.09%, Barbados 50.09%, and Oman 50.12%. Ordering these values from highest to lowest creates a precise ranking, but the substantive difference between them is extremely small. It is more informative to describe them as having roughly half of male pre-primary enrolment in public institutions.
This is especially important with a one-year snapshot. A difference of a few tenths of a percentage point may reflect ordinary reporting variation, changes in enrolment counts, or differences in institutional classification. Without a time series and metadata for each jurisdiction, it would be misleading to treat a small numerical gap as a major structural distinction.
A high public share is not a quality score
The indicator describes the structure of provision, not its success. Public institutions may play a dominant role because governments directly operate most pre-primary settings, because private provision is limited, or because policy has expanded public capacity. But the same percentage does not reveal how easy it is to find a place, whether families face fees, whether staffing levels are adequate, or what children learn.
The reverse is also true. A smaller public share does not automatically imply weak public commitment. Some education systems rely heavily on regulated or subsidized non-public providers. Others classify institutions in ways that require local context. For policy analysis, the public-share measure is best paired with enrolment or participation rates, public education spending, legal guarantees of free or compulsory pre-primary education, and indicators on teachers and facilities.
Coverage matters: 84 observations are not the whole world
The 2024 file contains 84 reported national or territorial observations, not a complete set of every jurisdiction collected by UIS. Major countries such as the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the United Kingdom are not present in this particular 2024 observation set. Their absence must not be interpreted as a value of zero. Missing or unreported data are fundamentally different from an observed zero.
The list also includes territories and special administrative regions, such as Hong Kong SAR, Macao SAR, Cayman Islands, and Gibraltar. For that reason, it is more accurate to describe the records as country and territory observations rather than a ranking of sovereign states. The data are well suited to comparing the places that actually report a value, but they do not justify an invented global average or an estimate for places with no observation.
How to use the male series in gender analysis
Because the series is labelled male, it is tempting to treat it as a measure of the male share within public institutions. That is the wrong denominator. To study gender balance, the male series should be compared with the corresponding female series for the same year, education level, and institution type. Only then can an analyst ask whether boys and girls are distributed differently between public and non-public provision.
Even a very small difference between the male and female public shares would not prove equal access to pre-primary education. Both sexes could have similar institution-type shares while overall participation remains low. Conversely, participation might be high while the public-private mix differs by sex. Keeping those questions separate prevents one indicator from being used to answer a question it was not designed to measure.
A better way to compare education systems
Start with the median and quartiles before focusing on country ranks. In this 2024 set, a value around 51% is common, so a result of 52% is not unusually high. Next, look at the tails of the distribution. Observations above 60% or below 45% are rare here and may be useful starting points for deeper institutional research. Finally, if several years become available, within-country change can be more informative than a single-year league table.
The public-share series becomes more useful when it is combined with other measures. A researcher can ask whether places with a high public share also have high pre-primary participation, whether public spending is aligned with the structure of provision, or whether legal guarantees translate into broader enrolment. These are separate empirical questions, and each requires its own data rather than assumptions based on the public-share percentage alone.
Source and interpretation limits
The calculations in this article use the official UNESCO Institute for Statistics ETOIP.02.PU.M observations for 2024. UIS indicator browsing and metadata are also available through the UIS Data Browser. The published values are used as reported, and jurisdictions without a 2024 observation are not filled with zeros or estimated values.
The main conclusion is straightforward: reported 2024 values are strongly concentrated near 50%, but a small group of countries and territories lies far from that center, ranging from about one third to nearly three quarters. Those differences are useful for identifying contrasting models of provision. They should be treated as a starting point for analysis, not as a score of educational quality or access.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the typical public share of male pre-primary enrolment in 2024?
Across the 84 reported countries and territories, the median was about 51.14% and the mean was 51.29%. Most observations were close to 50%, although the full range ran from 33.33% to 74.22%.
Does a higher public share mean a higher pre-primary enrolment rate?
No. This indicator measures the institution type used by boys who are enrolled in pre-primary education. Overall participation requires a separate enrolment or participation-rate indicator.
Should countries with no 2024 value be treated as zero?
No. A missing or unreported observation is not the same as zero. Comparisons should use only the jurisdictions with reported values or clearly mark missing data.
Related Articles
Green Map creates custom-edited map images using open geographic data sources such as geoBoundaries, Natural Earth, OpenStreetMap, and government open data. These maps are edited visual materials, not raw data files, and are provided for education, documents, presentations, and graphic reference.
