Higher Education

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 367–385 | Cite as

Resource asymmetries and cumulative advantages: Canadian and US research universities and the field of global health

Article

Abstract

Global health is becoming an important area of inquiry and learning in North American research universities, stemming from on-going and new commitments to the field by multiple governmental and non-governmental agents. External demands for research and education in global health require enhanced inter-disciplinary, inter-sectoral and international collaborations, all perceived as growing trends but often not easily accommodated in universities. This paper investigates how four leading universities in Canada and the US have entered the field of global health, exploring the relationships among national contexts, academic structures, and institutional strategies. Content analysis of institutional records is triangulated with data from sixty interviews with academic leaders and researchers at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, McGill and Toronto. Resource asymmetries emerge as an important differentiating factor shaping the emergence of global health in the American and Canadian institutions. Domestic sources of support and previous academic structures provided important cumulative advantages to the US campuses in claiming national and international leadership in the field.

Keywords

Academic organization Emerging fields Global health Interdisciplinary programs 

References

  1. Abbott, A. (2002). The Disciplines and the Future. In S. Brint (Ed.), The future of the City of Intellect. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Altbach, P., & Balán, J. (2007). Worldclass worldwide: Transforming research universities in Asia and Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastos, C. (1999). Global responses to AIDS: Science in emergency. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beaglehole, R. (Ed.). (2003). Global public health: A new era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ben-David, J. (1971). The scientist’s role in society: A comparative study. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Blau, P. M. (1994). The organization of academic work (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Transactions.Google Scholar
  8. Board on Global Health-BGH. (2006). Ensuring an infectious disease workforce: Education and training needs for the 21st century—workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  9. Board on International Health & Institute of Medicine. (1997). America’s vital interest in global health: Protecting our people, enhancing our economy, and advancing our international interests. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  10. Breman, J., & LeDuc, J. (2001). International partnerships in infectious diseases research, training, and control. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 7(3 Suppl.), 542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brint, S. (2005). Creating the future: ‘New directions’ in American research universities. Minerva, 43(1), 23–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, T. M., Cueto, M., & Fee, E. (2006). The World Health Organization and the transition from “international” to “global” public health. American Journal of Public Health, 96(1), 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bryant, J., & Harrison, P. (1996). Global health in transition: A synthesis perspectives from international organizations. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  14. Clark, B. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, B. (1995). Places of inquiry: Research and advanced education in modern universities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cooper, A., Kirton, J., & Schrecker, T. (2007). Governing global health: Challenge, response, innovation. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  17. Crone, R. (2008). Flat medicine? Exploring trends in the globalization of health care. Academic Medicine, 83(2), 117–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davis, J., & Lederberg, J. (Eds.). (2001). Emerging infectious diseases from the global to the local perspective: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  19. Fisher, D., Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & House, D. (2001). Changes in the academy/industry/state relations in Canada: The creation and development of the Networks of Centres of Excellence. Minerva, 39, 299–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fort, M., Mercer, M. A., & Gish, O. (2006). Sickness and wealth: The corporate assault on global health. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  21. Frickel, S., & Gross, N. (2005). A general theory of scientific/intellectual movements. American Sociological Review, 70(2), 204–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ganem, D. (2003). Bridge building between medicine and basic science: The role of the physician–scientist. Presentation at the Institute of Medicine Workshop on Ensuring an Infectious Disease Workforce: Education and Training Needs for the 21st Century. Institute of Medicine Forum on Microbial Threats, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  23. Garrett, L. (2003). Betrayal of trust: The collapse of global public health. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Garrett, L. (2007). The challenge of global health. Foreign affairs, January/February 2007. http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070101faessay86103-p10/laurie-garrett/the-challenge-of-global-health.html. Accessed on Oct 10, 2008.
  25. Geiger, R. (2004). Knowledge and money: Research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Global IDEA Scientific Advisory Committee. (2004). Health and economic benefits of an accelerated program of research to combat global infectious diseases. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 171(10), 1203–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harrison, M., & Coussens, C. (2007). Global environmental health in the 21st century: From governmental regulation to corporate social responsibility: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  28. IDRC. (2003). Research without (southern) borders. Final Report of a National Roundtable of the New Directions of in International Research in Canada. May 22–23, 2008. Ottawa: IDRC.Google Scholar
  29. Jones, G. A., & Oleksiyenko, A. (2008). Exploring the inter-relationships among federal, provincial, and institutional policy in the internationalization of Canadian university research. Paper presented at the International workshop on “The Internationalization of Higher Education and Higher Education Reforms”. Institute for Higher Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, November 4–6, 2008.Google Scholar
  30. Jong, S. (2008). Academic organizations and new industrial fields; Berkeley and Stanford after the rise of biotechnology. Research Policy, 37(8), 1267–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kerr, C. (1991). The new race to be Harvard or Berkeley or Stanford. Change, 1991, 8–15.Google Scholar
  32. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills/London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Lemon, S., Hamburg, M., Sparling, P., Choffnes, E., & Mack, A. (2007). Global infectious disease surveillance and detection: Assessing the challenges–finding solutions: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  34. LeRoy, L. (1999). International grant making by US foundations. Health Affairs, 18(3), 234–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Levin, R. (2004). Millions saved: Proven successes in global health. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute.Google Scholar
  36. Macfarlane, S. B., Jacobs, M., & Kaaya, E. E. (2008). In the name of global health: Trends in academic institutions. Journal of Public Health Policy, 29(4), 383–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43(3), 281–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Markle, W., Fisher, M., & Smego, R. (2007). Understanding global health. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical.Google Scholar
  39. McNeil, D. (2005). New ideas in global health get a $437 million assist. New York Times, June 28, 2005: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/health/policy/28gate.html. Accessed on Sep 10, 2008.
  40. Merson, M., Black, R., & Mills, A. (2004). International public health: Diseases, programs, systems, and policies. Woods Hole: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar
  41. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. OECD. (2006). The United States: Development assistance committee peer review. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  43. OECD. (2007). Canada: Development assistance committee peer review. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  44. O’Neill, E. (2006). Awakening hippocrates: A primer on health, poverty and global service. Chicago: AMA Bookstore.Google Scholar
  45. Oleksiyenko, A. (2008). Global portfolios and strategic international partnerships of a major research university. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  46. Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  48. Quinn, T. (2008). The Johns Hopkins centre for global health: Transcending borders for world health. Academic Medicine, 83(2), 134–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reich, M. (2002). Public–private partnerships for public health. Cambridge: Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies.Google Scholar
  50. Saba, N., & Brewer, T. (2008). Beyond borders: Building global health programs at McGill University Faculty of Medicine. Academic Medicine, 83(2), 185–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sanders, D., Labonte, R., Baum, F., Chopra, M. (2004). Making research matter: a civil society perspective on health research. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82(10). http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?pid=S004296862004001000011&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en. Accessed on June 5, 2009.
  52. Stein, J., Stren, R., Fitzgibbon, J., & Maclean, M. (2001). Networks of knowledge. Collaborative innovation in international learning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Whitley, R. (2008). Universities as strategic actors: Limitations and variations. In Lars. Engwall & Denis. Weaire (Eds.), The university in the market (Vol. 84). Portland: Portland Press Limited. Wenner-Gren International Series.Google Scholar
  55. WHO. (1986). The Ottawa Charter for health promotion. Adopted at International Conference On Health Promotion, “The Move Towards A New Public Health”, Nov 17–21, 1986 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Online copy available at http://www.who.int/hpr/NPH/docs/ottawa_charter_hp.pdf.
  56. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations