Abstract
This chapter looks into the historical process of establishing and strengthening of the non-university sector in Croatia since the mid-1990s onwards and offers an account of its outcome. Initially, the process was part of the country’s broader efforts not only to ensure regionally balanced development, but also to improve quality, efficiency and accessibility to higher education. Since 2001, it was further embedded in broader higher education reform efforts, especially the implementation of the Bologna Process. This reform entailed, on the one hand, the establishment of non-university – professionally oriented – higher education institutions and, on the other hand, a gradual abolishment of professional study programmes in universities. The authors suggest that only a small part of the reform goals have been achieved, whereby some non-university institutions have been established and the number of students enrolled in professional programmes at universities has somewhat decreased. Effectively, the reform failed to align the distinction between types of higher education institutions and types of programmes, rendering the binary divide, at best, blurred. The authors argue that such outcome has been a result of, on the one hand, the governments’ reliance on formal regulation as the main policy instrument, which allowed for discretion in interpretation and enforcement of rules, and, on the other hand, the fact that the most dominant actor – universities – has continuously opposed the reforms.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Gornitzka also states the ‘normative basis’, that is, the underlying ideology, as an element of policy content. However, due to the fact that the analysed policy documents do not include explicit references to ideological principles, this aspect of the policy content of the Croatian structural reform will not be analysed in this chapter.
- 2.
Prior to dissolution of Yugoslavia (1992), it was predominantly the state control model.
- 3.
An example of this is a large-scale project “Towards equitable and transparent access to higher education in Croatia” (ACCESS), funded through the TEMPUS (Trans-European Mobility Scheme for University Studies) programme. The project focused on funding of higher education and socio-economic characteristics of the student population (the latter effectively being the national report for Croatia within the EUROSTUDENT project). Results of the project (Cvitan et al., 2011; Doolan et al., 2011) do highlight problems of reproduction of social inequality in higher education – students of lower socio-economic background are under-represented in universities and under-represented in higher education in general – but they provide a snapshot of the situation and not a longitudinal analysis potentially useful for evaluating the effects of reforms.
References
Bacevic, J. (2014). (Education for) work sets you free: ‘employability’ and higher education in former Yugoslavia and its successor states. European Journal of Higher Education, 4(3), 281–296. doi:10.1080/21568235.2014.916534.
Bleiklie, I., Enders, J., & Lepori, B. (2015). Organizations as penetrated hierarchies: Environmental pressures and control in professional organizations. Organization Studies, 36(7), 873–896. doi:10.1177/0170840615571960.
Bovens, M., & ‘t Hart, P. (2016). Revisiting the study of policy failures. Journal of European Public, Policy no. 23(5), 653–666.
Cvitan, M., Doolan, K., Farnell, T., & Matković, T. (2011). Socijalna i ekonomska slika studentskog života u Hrvatskoj: Nacionalno izvješće istraživanja EUROSTUDENT za Hrvatsku. Zagreb: Institut za razvoj obrazovanja.
Doolan, K., Dolenec, D., & Domazet, M. (2011). Hrvatski sustav financiranja visokog obrazovanja u europskom kontekstu: Komparativna studija. Zagreb: Institut za razvoj obrazovanja.
Gornitzka, Å. (1999). Governmental policies and organisational change in higher education. Higher Education, 38(1), 5–31.
Gornitzka, Å., & Maassen, P. (2000). Hybrid steering approaches with respect to European higher education. Higher Education Policy, 13(3), 267–285.
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Longman.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.
Majone, G., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation as evolution. In J. L. Pressman & A. Wildavsky (Eds.), Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; Or, why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all, this being a saga of the economic development administration as told by two sympathetic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation of ruined hopes (pp. 163–180). Berkeley: University of California Press.
May, P. J. (2015). Implementation failures revisited: Policy regime perspectives. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3–4), 277–299. doi:10.1177/0952076714561505.
Musselin, C. (2005). Change or Continuity in higher education governance? In I. Bleiklie & M. Henkel (Eds.), Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education (pp. 65–79). Dordrecht: Springer.
Olsen, J. P. (1988). Administrative reform and theories of organization. In C. Campbell & G. B. Peters (Eds.), Organizing governance, governing organization (pp. 233–254). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Orosz, A. (2008). The Bologna Process in Croatia. European Education, 40(2), 66–84.
Peters, B. G. (2015). State failure, governance failure and policy failure: Exploring the linkages. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3–4), 261–276. doi:10.1177/0952076715581540.
Reichard, M. (1992). Politics and culture in Croatian higher education: A comparative perspective on educational reform. Community Services Catalyst, 22(4), 11–21.
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2003). Network politics, political capital, and democracy. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(6), 609–634.
Thelen, K. A., & Mahoney, J. (2010). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players: How political institutions work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Zgaga, P. (2013). Higher education research and higher education policy in South-East Europe. European Journal of Higher Education, 1–15. doi:10.1080/21568235.2013.819671.
Zittoun, P. (2015). Analysing policy failure as an argumentative strategy in the policymaking process: A pragmatist perspective. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3–4), 243–260. doi:10.1177/0952076715581634.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brankovic, J., Vukasovic, M. (2017). Partial Horizontal Differentiation in Croatian Higher Education: How Ideas, Institutions and Interests Shape the Policy Process. In: Policy Analysis of Structural Reforms in Higher Education. Palgrave Studies in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42237-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42237-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42236-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42237-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)