Tertiary Education and Management

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 17–29 | Cite as

Identifying indicators of university autonomy according to stakeholders’ interests

  • Seungchan ChoiEmail author
Original Paper


This paper is an attempt to reconcile two different perspectives and come up with a more comprehensive conceptualization of university autonomy by adopting a stakeholder approach in identifying indicators of university autonomy. One perspective views university autonomy as a protection of academic freedom and the other as a performance enhancer. In order to secure public support for university autonomy, a strategy to satisfy both perspectives is required. A stakeholder approach helps identifying stakeholder interests which leads to an analysis of what is expected in return for university autonomy. University autonomy indicators developed out of these interests would facilitate a measure to evaluate and secure academic freedom and institutional autonomy in a way that secures better support for university autonomy from higher education stakeholders. This paper examines existing literature to identify higher education stakeholders and their interests and comes up with an example of autonomy indicators that reflect these interests.


University autonomy Academic freedom University accountability Stakeholders Indicators 



This work was supported by a 2-Year Research Grant of Pusan National University.


  1. AAUP American Association of University Professors (1915). Declaration of principles on academic freedom and academic tenure, available at, Accessed 13 May 2018.
  2. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., & Stein, J. C. (2008). Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND Journal of Economics (Wiley-Blackwell), 39(3), 617–635. Scholar
  3. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, C., Hoxby, M., Mas-Colell, A., & Sapir, A. (2009). The governance and performance of research universities: Evidence from Europe and the U.S. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  4. Alves, H., Mainardes, E. W., & Raposo, M. (2010). A relationship approach to higher education institution stakeholder management. Tertiary Education and Management, 16, 159–181. Scholar
  5. Ash, M. G. (2006). Bachelor of what, master of whom? The Humboldt myth and historical transformations of higher education in German-speaking Europe and the US. European Journal of Education, 41(2), 245–267. Scholar
  6. Bauries, S. R. (2014). Individual academic freedom: An ordinary concern of the first amendment. Mississippi Law Journal, 83, 677–743.Google Scholar
  7. Beiter, K. D., Karran, T., & Appiagyei-Atua, K. (2016). 'Measuring' the erosion of academic freedom as an international human right: A report on the legal protection of academic freedom in Europe. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 49, 597–691.Google Scholar
  8. Bilgrami, A. (2010). Truth, balance, and freedom. In J. Franck & J. Bricmont (Eds.), Chomsky notebook (pp. 334 to 347). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boer, H. de Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & File, J. (2010). Progress in higher education reform across Europe. Governance reform. Volume 1: Executive summary and main report. Enschede: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  10. Bogue, E.G., & Aper, J. (2000). Exploring the heritage of American Higher Education: The evolution of philosophy and policy. Phoenix: The Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  11. Butler, J. (2009). Critique, dissent, disciplinarity. Critical Inquiry, 35, 773–795. Scholar
  12. Byrne, P. (2015). Academic freedom for the next 100 years : Social value of academic freedom defended. Indiana Law Journal, 91, 5–16.Google Scholar
  13. Byun, K. (2008). New public management in Korean higher education: Is it reality or another fad? Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(2), 190–205. Scholar
  14. Christensen, T. (2011). University governance reforms: Potential problems of more autonomy? Higher Education, 62, 503–517. Scholar
  15. Christensen, T. (2012). Global ideas and modern public sector reforms: A theoretical elaboration and empirical discussion of a neoinstitutional theory. American Review of Public Administration, 42(6), 635–653. Scholar
  16. Cole, J. R. (2009). Defending academic freedom and free inquiry. Social Research, 76(3), 811–844 Retrieved from Scholar
  17. Davies, M. (2015). Academic freedom: A lawyer's perspective. Higher Education, 70(6), 987–1002. Scholar
  18. DBIS Department for Business Innovation & Skills (2011). Students at the Heart of the System.Google Scholar
  19. DBIS Department for Business Innovation & Skills (2016). Success as a knowledge economy: Teaching excellence, Social mobility and student choice. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  20. Doğan, D. (2016). Academic freedom from the perspectives of academics and students: A qualitative study. Education & Science, 41(184), 311–−331. Scholar
  21. EC European Commission (2011). Supporting growth and jobs - an agenda for the modernization of Europe’s higher education systems. Communication from the commission to the parliament, the council, The European economic and social committee and the Committee of the Regions. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  22. Elton, L. (2008). Collegiality and complexity: Humboldt’s relevance to British universities today. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(3), 224–236.Google Scholar
  23. Enders, J., Boer, H. d., & Weyer, E. (2013). Regulatory autonomy and performance: The reform of higher education re-visited. Higher Education, 65(1), 5–23. Scholar
  24. Estermann, T., Nokkala, T., & Steinel, M. (2011). University autonomy in Europe II the scorecard. The European University Association.Google Scholar
  25. EUA European University Association (2001) Message from Salamanca shaping the European Higher Education Area, accessed at
  26. Felt, U., & Glanz, M. (2003). University autonomy in Europe: Changing paradigms in higher education policy. University of Vienna.Google Scholar
  27. Fish, S. (2014). Versions of academic freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.Google Scholar
  29. Gajda, A. (2015). Academic freedom for the next 100 years: Academic duty and academic freedom. Indiana Law Journal, 91, 17–37.Google Scholar
  30. Gibbons, M. (1998). Higher education relevance in the 21st century. Education, the. World Bank.Google Scholar
  31. Gillon, B. & Henderson, I. (2012). What is academic freedom? University world news, 28 October, issue 245.Google Scholar
  32. Hammersley, M. (2016). Can academic freedom be justified? Reflections on the arguments of Robert Post and Stanley Fish. Higher Education Quarterly, 70(2), 108–126. Scholar
  33. Hearn, J. C., Warshaw, J. B., & Ciarimboli, E. B. (2016). Privatization and accountability trends and policies in U.S. public higher education. Education & Science, 41(184), 1–−26. Scholar
  34. Herbert, A., & Tienari, J. (2013). Transplanting tenure and the (re)construction of academic freedoms. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 157–173. Scholar
  35. Hogan, P. C. (2015). The personal ethics of academic freedom: Problems of knowledge and democratic competence. AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom, 6, 1–15.Google Scholar
  36. Jankowski, N., & Provezis, S. (2014). Neoliberal ideologies, governmentality and the academy: An examination of accountability through assessment and transparency. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 46(5), 475–487. Scholar
  37. Jongbloed, B., Boer, H. D. Enders, J., & File, J. (2010). Progress in higher education reform across Europe. Funding reform. Volume 1: Executive summary and main report. Enschede: Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  38. Kettunen, J. (2015). Stakeholder relationships in higher education. Tertiary Education and Management, 21(1), 56–65. Scholar
  39. Kivistö, J. (2008). An assessment of agency theory as a framework for the government-university relationship. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 30(4), 339–350. Scholar
  40. Knott, J. H., & Payne, A. A. (2004). The impact of state governance structures on management and performance of public organizations: A study of higher education institutions. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(1), 13–30. Scholar
  41. Leisyte, L., Westerheijden, D. F., Epping, E., Faber, M., & Weert, E. D. (2013) Stakeholders and quality assurance in higher education, Paper for 26th Annual CHER Conference Lausanne (CH).Google Scholar
  42. LeRoy, M. H. (2016). How Courts View Academic Freedom. Journal of College and University Law, 42(1), 1–58.Google Scholar
  43. Liefner, I. (2003). Funding, resource allocation, and performance in higher education systems. Higher Education, 46, 469–489. Scholar
  44. Macfarlane, B. (2012). Re-framing student academic freedom: A capability perspective. Higher Education, 63(6), 719–732. Scholar
  45. Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. McMahon, W. M. (2009). The private and social benefits of higher education: Higher learning, greater good. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Miller, B. (2014). Free to manage? A neo-liberal defence of academic freedom in British higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 36(2), 143–154. Scholar
  48. Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886 Retrieved from Scholar
  49. MoE Ministry of Education (2015). The master plan for the Program for Industrial needs-Matched Education (PRIME) (in Korean). Google Scholar
  50. Neville, B. A., Bell, S. J., & Whitwell, G. J. (2011). Stakeholder salience revisited: Refining, redefining, and refueling an underdeveloped conceptual tool. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(3), 357–378. Scholar
  51. Nokkala, T. (2012). Institutional autonomy and the attractiveness of the European higher education area - facts or tokenistic discourse? In A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu, & L. Wilson (Eds.), European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms (pp. 59–81). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  52. Post, R. (2012). Democracy, expertise and academic freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Post, R. (2013). Why bother with academic freedom? FIU Law Review, 9, 9–20.Google Scholar
  54. Robertson, M. (2016). Versions of academic freedom. Journal of Legal Education, 65, 672–703.Google Scholar
  55. Sadler, R. (2005). Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175–194. Scholar
  56. Shepherd, J. (2006). Staff are silenced by fear of reprisals. Times Higher Education Supplement, 4 August., Accessed 13 May 2018.
  57. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Sporn, B. (2002). Convergence or divergence in international higher education policy: Lessons from Europe. Vienna University.Google Scholar
  59. Stein, D. G. (Ed.). (2004). Buying in or selling out? The commercialization of the American research university. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Tierney, W. G., & Lanford, M. (2014). The question of academic freedom: Universal right or relative term. Frontiers of Education in China, 9(1), 4–23. Scholar
  61. UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (1997). Recommendation concerning the status of higher-education teaching personnel., Accessed 13 May 2018.
  62. Watson, C. (2011). Accountability, transparency, redundancy: Academic identities in an era of “excellence”. British Educational Research Journal, 37(6), 955–971. Scholar

Copyright information

© EAIR - The European Higher Education Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pusan National UniversityBusanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations