Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Governance in transition: an analytical framework for hybridity and dynamics in higher education

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The rich body of literature that has sought to shed light on how global trends shape public sector institutions at the local level frequently claims that globalization is significantly transforming national institutions. Against that backdrop, the term governance is actually a multifaceted concept representing an ongoing process characterized by complex interactions between globally spreading movements and locally inherited interests. Focusing on transitions in governance and on the variations found in governance at the local level, the present study aims to make a conceptual contribution to existing characterizations of the dynamics of higher education in the context of globalization. After reviewing studies on changes in the governance of higher education, this paper identifies the limitations and implications of various theoretical approaches to describing the transformation of governance in the education sector. We then construct a hybrid analytical framework combining the main elements of institutional analysis (i.e., rational choice, sociological and historical institutionalism) with theories of public policy as a novel way of conceptualizing and operationalizing educational governance. While some scholars might be hesitant to embrace such an approach, we would argue that it deserves consideration. The framework provides an explicit conceptual construct for advancing the theoretical understanding of the concept of hybridization, which is of great utility for identifying the nuances of higher education governance in transition. Moreover, the analytical framework presented herein contributes to a more find-grained understanding of educational transition and extends previous empirical studies on dynamics in the higher education sector. The results can not only supplement the current approach to studying HE governance but also outline a possible trajectory for further research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ball, S. J. (2010). Global education, heterarchies, and hybrid organizations. In M. Ka-Ho (Ed.), The search for new governance of higher education in Asia (pp. 13–27). Palgrave Macmillan US.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, C. J. (1991). What is policy convergence and what causes it? British Journal of Political Science, 21(2), 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning - Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25(3), 275–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleiklie, I., & Michelsen, S. (2013). Comparing HE policies in Europe. Higher Education, 65(1), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9584-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleiklie, I., Enders, J., & Lepori, B. (2017). Managing universities: Policy and organizational change from a Western European comparative perspective. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bolleyer, N. (2013). Paradoxes of self-coordination in federal systems. In A. Benz & J. Broschek (Eds.), Federal dynamics: Continuity, change, and the varieties of federalism (pp. 321–342). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T. (2010). Hybridity/Hybridization. In H. K. Anheier & S. Toepler (Eds.), International encyclopedia of civil society (pp. 839–842). Springer US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., van de Donk, W., & Putters, K. (2005). Griffins or chameleons? Hybridity as a permanent and inevitable characteristic of the third sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 28(9–10), 749–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, D. (2008). Organising the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies. Science and Public Policy, 35(4), 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broucker, B., & De Wit, K. (2015). New public management in higher education. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. D. Dill, & M. Souto-Otero (Eds.), The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance (pp. 57–75). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2010). Institutional Reproduction and Change. In G. Morgan, J. L. Campbell, C. Crouch, O. K. Pedersen, & R. Whitley (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Institutional Analysis (pp. 87–115). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Capano, G. (2011). Government continues to do its job: A comparative study of governance shifts in the higher education sector. Public Administration, 89(4), 1622–1642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G., Rayner, J., & Zito, A. R. (2012). Governance from the bottom up: Complexity and divergence in comparative perspective. Public Administration, 90(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02001.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2015a). Re-thinking governance in public policy: Dynamics, strategy and capacities. In G. Capano, M. Howlett, & M. Ramesh (Eds.), Varieties of governance: Dynamics, strategies, capacities (pp. 3–24). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (Eds.). (2015b). Varieties of governance: Dynamics, strategies, capacities. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G., Regini, M., & Turri, M. (2017b). Changing governance in universities: Italian higher education in comparative perspective. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capano, G., Pritoni, A., & Vicentini, G. (2017a). Policy Instruments Matter! How governments’ choice of policy mix shapes higher education performance in Western Europe. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Public Policy, Singapore.

  • Chan, S.-J., & Yang, C.-C. (2017). Hybrid university in Taiwan: The prominence of traditional intellects. Studies in Higher Education, 42(10), 1853–1869. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1376869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, M.-H., Jungblut, J., Ravinet, P., & Vukasovic, M. (2017). Higher education governance and policy: An introduction to multi-issue, multi-level and multi-actor dynamics. Policy and Society, 36(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1287999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Complexity and hybrid public administration—Theoretical and empirical challenges. Public Organization Review, 11(4), 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-010-0141-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C., Streeck, W., Whitley, R., & Campbell, J. L. (2007). Institutional change and globalization. Socio-Economic Review, 5(3), 527–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croucher, G., & Woelert, P. (2016). Institutional isomorphism and the creation of the unified national system of higher education in Australia: An empirical analysis. Higher Education, 71(4), 439–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9914-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deem, R. (2001). Globalization, new managerialism, academic capitalism and entrepreneurialism in universities; Is the local dimension still important? Comparative Education, 37(1), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, J.-L., Ferkie, E., & van Gestel, N. (2015). Understanding hybridity in public organizations. Public Administration, 93(2), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D. D., & Beerkens, M. (Eds.). (2010). Public policy for academic quality: Analyses of innovative policy instruments. Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbins, M., & Knill, C. (2014). Higher education governance and policy change in Western Europe: International challenges to historical institutions. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dolowitz, D., & Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance, 13(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donina, D., & Paleari, S. (2019). New public management: Global reform script or conceptual stretching? Analysis of university governance structures in the Napoleonic administrative tradition. Higher Education, 78(2), 193–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0338-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferlie, E., Musselin, C., & Andresani, G. (2008). The steering of higher education systems: A public management perspective. Higher Education, 56(3), 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfinch, S., & Wallis, J. (2010). Two myths of convergence in public management reform. Public Administration, 88(4), 1099–1115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01848.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gornitzka, Å., & Maassen, P. (2000). Hybrid steering approaches with respect to European higher education. Higher Education Policy, 13, 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gornitzka, Å., Kogan, M., & Amaral, A. (Eds.). (2005). Reform and change in higher education: Analysing policy implementation. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalism. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heichel, S., Pape, J., & Sommerer, T. (2005). Is there convergence in convergence research? An overview of empirical studies on policy convergence. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 817–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzinger, K., & Knill, C. (2005). Causes and conditions of cross-national policy convergence. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 775–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1983). The tools of government. Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2009). Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design. Policy Sciences, 42(1), 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2011). Designing public policies: Principles and instruments. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.-C. (2020). Internationalization of higher education in the crucible: Linking national identity and policy in the age of globalization. International Journal of Educational Development, 78, 102245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.-C., & Huisman, J. (2017). Higher education policy change in the European higher education area: Divergence of quality assurance systems in England and the Netherlands. Research Papers in Education, 32(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2015.1129645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Immergut, E. M. (2006). Institutional constraints on policy. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 557–571). Oxford University Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, D. S. L., & Mok, K.-H. (2019). Transformations in higher education governance in Asia: Policy, politics and progress. Springer Singapore.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Smith, H., Nohrstedt, D., Weible, C. M., & Ingold, K. (2018). The advocacy coalition framework: An overview of the research program. In C. M. Weible, P. A. Sabatier, C. M. Weible, & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed.). Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, P. (1998). Analysing public policy. Pinter Pub Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jungblut, J., & Vukasovic, M. (2013). And now for something completely different? Re-examining hybrid steering approaches in higher education. Higher Education Policy, 26(4), 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2013.28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jungblut, J., & Vukasovic, M. (2018). Not all markets are created equal: Re-conceptualizing market elements in higher education. Higher Education, 75(5), 855–870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0174-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabir, A. H. (2021). ‘Network governance’ and the formation of the strategic plan in the higher education sector in Bangladesh. Journal of Education Policy, 36(4), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2020.1717637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepori, B., & Jongbloed, B. (2018). National resource allocation decisions in higher education: Objectives and dilemmas. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, D., & Kearney, M.-L. (2017). The hybrid university in East Asia: History, development, and challenges. Studies in Higher Education, 42(10), 1801–1802. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1371909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, W. Y. W. (2016). The recalibration of neoliberalisation: Repoliticising higher education policy in Hong Kong. Higher Education, 73(5), 759–773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-9989-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2009). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2008). Elaborating the “New Institutionalism”. In S. A. Binder, R. A. W. Rhodes, & B. A. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (pp. 3-20). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2006). The logic of appropriateness. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political science (pp. 689–708). Oxford University Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: Rise of the Confucian model. Higher Education, 61(5), 587–611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9384-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007). Globalisation and Higher Education, OECD Education. Working Papers, No. 8, OECD Publishing.

  • Mok, K.-H. (2005). Pro-competition policy tools and state capacity: Corporatisation of public universities in Hong Kong and Singapore. Policy and Society, 24(3), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K.-H. (2006). Education reform and education policy in East Asia. London Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K.-H. (2011). The quest for regional hub of education: Growing heterarchies, organizational hybridization, and new governance in Singapore and Malaysia. Journal of Education Policy, 26(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.498900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K.-H. (2021). Managing neo-liberalism with Chinese characteristics: The rise of education markets and Higher education governance in China. International Journal of Educational Development, 84, 102401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K.-H., & Han, X. (2017). Higher education governance and policy in China: Managing decentralization and transnationalism. Policy and Society, 36(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1288964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mok, K.-H., & Jiang, J. (2020). Towards corporatized collaborative governance: The multiple networks model and entrepreneurial universities in Hong Kong. Studies in Higher Education, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1823647

  • Mooney, C. Z. (2001). Modeling regional effects on state policy diffusion. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musselin, C., & Teixeira, P. N. (2014). Reforming higher education: Public policy design and implementation. Springer Netherlands.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhagen, G. M., Bleiklie, I., & Hope, K. (2017). Policy instruments in European universities: Implementation of higher education policies. In I. Bleiklie, J. Enders, & B. Lepori (Eds.), Managing universities: Policy and organizational change from a Western European comparative perspective (pp. 275–300). Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. P. (2007). The institutional dynamics of the European university. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration. (Vol. 19). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2012). Governance as political theory. In J. Yu & S. Guo (Eds.), Civil society and governance in China (pp. 17–37). Palgrave Macmillan US.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2015). Pursuing horizontal management: The politics of public sector coordination. University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2003). Processes of policy borrowing in education: Some explanatory and analytical devices. Comparative Education, 39(4), 451–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006032000162020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piattoni, S. (2010). The theory of multi-level governance: Conceptual, empirical, and normative challenges. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, J. (2000). Debating governance. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, J. (2013). Globalization and governance. Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reale, E., & Seeber, M. (2013). Instruments as empirical evidence for the analysis of Higher Education policies. Higher Education, 65(1), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9585-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (2007a). The need for better theories. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 3–17). Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (Ed.). (2007b). Theories of the policy process. Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J. C. (2012). Higher education development in Korea: Western university ideas, Confucian tradition, and economic development. Higher Education, 64(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9480-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond continuity. Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vught, F. A. (Ed.). (1989). Governmental strategies and innovation in higher education. Jessica Kingsley.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vught, F. A., & Ziegele, F. (Eds.). (2012). Multidimensional ranking. Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zito, A. R. (2015). Environmental policy and governance: Bringing the State Back In (Again)? In G. Capano, M. Howlett, & M. Ramesh (Eds.), Varieties of governance: Dynamics, strategies, capacities (pp. 74–100). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (Grant number MOST 107–2410-H-259–050).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education and Learning Technology, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Chuo-Chun Hsieh

Authors
  1. Chuo-Chun Hsieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuo-Chun Hsieh.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsieh, CC. Governance in transition: an analytical framework for hybridity and dynamics in higher education. High Educ 85, 379–397 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00839-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00839-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation