The child grows, but the book does not

By law, the state provides compulsory schools with teaching materials, and this arrangement rests on three pillars. The Directorate of Education and School Services (MMS) produces and distributes most teaching materials. The Teaching Materials Fund provides schools with money to buy teaching materials other than those supplied by MMS. The Teaching Materials Development Fund supports authors, publishers and companies in developing and publishing new materials.[1]

A state monopoly in practice

Most public funding for teaching materials, around 85%, goes to publishing by MMS. In 2025, funding for MMS’s teaching materials division amounted to ISK 458 million,[2] while contributions to the Teaching Materials Fund, which schools use to buy materials from other publishers, amounted to ISK 85 million.[3] That is equivalent to around ISK 9,800 per compulsory school pupil for state publishing, but only around ISK 1,800 that schools can spend as they choose (Figure 1).[2]

Although schools are formally allowed to buy teaching materials from private publishers, their scope to do so is limited. When schools have to choose between materials the state supplies free of charge and materials that must be paid for separately, the conditions for effective competition are limited. The arrangement makes it difficult for private publishers to compete on an equal footing and creates conditions resembling a state monopoly in practice.

Iceland the only Nordic country with centralised state publishing of teaching materials

The arrangement in Iceland differs from that in the countries we usually compare ourselves with. Iceland is the only Nordic country where the state plays such an extensive role in producing teaching materials (Figure 2). In Norway, the government supports the production of teaching materials for groups of pupils too small for the market to serve, and in Finland the national education agency only publishes materials for small target groups, in addition to what private publishers offer.[4]

Funding has eroded

Funding for the development of teaching materials has eroded significantly in recent decades. When the Teaching Materials Fund and the Teaching Materials Development Fund were established in 2007, each received around ISK 100 million, equivalent to around ISK 251 million at 2026 prices. By comparison, the contribution to the Teaching Materials Fund was ISK 85 million in 2025,[3] and under the 2026 budget the contribution to the Teaching Materials Development Fund is just under ISK 90 million.[2] Contributions to each fund are therefore only around a third of their original real value (Figure 3).

The same trend can be seen in funding for teaching materials publishing at MMS. Funding for its teaching materials division amounted to ISK 458 million in 2025,[2] equivalent to around ISK 9,800 per compulsory school pupil. In 1991, the amount was equivalent to just under ISK 29,000 per pupil at 2026 prices.[5]

In total, around ISK 633 million a year goes to teaching materials, less than half a percent of the annual operating costs of compulsory schools.[6]

Low funding for teaching materials is not due to spending on compulsory education being too low, as Iceland runs one of the most expensive compulsory school systems in the OECD, with spending per pupil 40–55% above the OECD average.[7] The problem is therefore much more one of priorities within the existing spending envelope.

Tasks are shifting to teachers

The share of Icelandic pupils in schools where principals report that a lack of teaching materials hinders instruction to some extent rose from 17% in 2022 to 25% in 2025, according to the latest PISA survey.[8] A lack of teaching materials means that teachers increasingly have to prepare materials themselves. According to a survey by the Directorate of Education, the predecessor of MMS, seven out of ten teachers often or very often use materials created within the school.[5]

Such an arrangement is inefficient. Materials prepared by teachers are rarely used by anyone other than those who prepared them and perhaps their closest colleagues. Similar work is therefore done over and over again in schools across the country, increasing teachers’ workload and taking time away from other tasks.

Let private publishers into the market for teaching materials

Viðskiptaráð therefore proposes that all public funding intended for the purchase of teaching materials for compulsory schools be channelled through the Teaching Materials Fund. Schools would then be free to spend their allocation on the teaching materials that best meet their pupils’ needs. At the same time, the role of MMS should be revised so that it assesses the quality of teaching materials and confirms that they meet the requirements of the national curriculum, rather than publishing them itself.

It is not a given that the state must produce teaching materials itself, even though it is responsible for ensuring access to them. By transferring funding to schools instead of tying it to state publishing, the efforts of more parties could be harnessed and the conditions created for more diverse and higher-quality teaching materials. It would also reduce the need for teachers to prepare their own materials, each in their own corner, which is both time-consuming and inefficient. Greater competition in publishing teaching materials creates an incentive to better meet schools’ needs, resulting in better and more diverse materials, to the benefit of teachers and pupils.

This is an English translation of an article originally published in Icelandic.