Abstract
This article examines parallel developments in the fields of quality assurance in higher education and in environmental policy. Starting from empirically grounded analytical frameworks for the two fields separately, Fischer's framework of policy argumentation is overlaid on both to gain deeper understanding of underlying similarities and contrasts. We argue that quality management in the field of higher education faces choices already addressed in environmental quality assurance. In the light of these practical and theoretical lessons, the relative success with higher education quality assurance may be less of a reason for optimism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
We stress, first, that the perception of issues as a social fact may well be more important than any ‘objective’ state of affairs. Second, this perspective of fast-changing temporary compromises instead of once-and-for-all solutions of problems is relatively new, at least for universities, which until the 1960s (or later?) were characterised often as ‘ivory towers’ that accommodated societal change at a low pace and only on ‘purely rational’ grounds.
The more or less autonomous development can be overridden by external events. The final row in the table, illustrating some consequences of the ‘Bologna process’, is an example of such ‘disturbances’, setting new challenges in a new context, for European higher education. We list this row for completeness’ sake, but the issue needs to remain beyond our current focus (van der Wende & Westerheijden, 2001; Westerheijden & van der Wende, 2001).
We are not the first ones to apply the general model to analysis of specific problems in specific policy fields. See, for example, Hoppe and Pranger (1993).
Major governmental budget cuts took place in the UK and the Netherlands just before the introduction of quality assurance instruments. Our point is that efficiency issues will crop up within quality assurance frameworks too.
This question is addressed extensively in Magelhães (2001).
Note that this definition is static and has not changed since then. In other words, the thinking on environmental care has not progressed from a certain phase to another, at least not at the policy level. Environmental care systems so defined are connected to the outside world, although only to a limited extent. First, in the years after the introduction of voluntary environmental care systems a practice of auditing has emerged and environmental care systems that contain the eight elements generally pass the audit. This result is sometimes communicated to the relevant public, most notably customers and suppliers. The second connection with the outside world is with the public authorities that issue licenses to the relevant industry. This interaction is probably the single most important element in influencing the environmental goals that the company adopts. As long as public authorities do not redefine these goals (and they often do not), the goals essentially stay the same. There is little impetus for firms to change the care system progressively. This implies that they must be placed at the level of problem solving in Fischer's terms.
Still, one should keep in mind that the tension between short-term success and long-term results remains unresolved. Short-term success may produce the very source of discontent about the social function of higher education.
References
Anderson, M. S., & Liefferink, D. ( 1997). European environmental policy. The pioneers. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Birnbaum, R., & Deshotels, J. ( 1999). Has the academy adopted TQM? Planning for Higher Education, 28 (1), 29– 37.
Campbell, C., Kanaan, S., Kehm, B., Mockiene, B., Westerheijden, D. F., & Williams, R. ( 2000). The European University: A handbook on institutional approaches to strategic management, quality management, European policy and academic recognition. Torino: European Training Foundation.
Fischer, F. ( 1985). Politics, values, and public policy: The problem of methodology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Fischer, F. ( 1995). Evaluating public policy. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.
Fischer, F. ( 2000). Citizens, experts and the environment. The politics of local knowledge, Durham.
Frazer, M. ( 1997). Report on the modalities of external evaluation of higher education in Europe: 1995–1997. Higher Education in Europe, 12 (3), 349– 401.
Grin, J., & van de Graaf, H. ( 1996). Technology assessment as learning. Science, Technology, and Human Values 20 (1), 72– 99.
Hajer, M. A. ( 1995). The politics of environmental discourse. Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hung, G., & Tauch, C. ( 2001). Trends in learning structures in higher education (II): Follow-up report prepared for the Salamanca and Prague conferences of March/May 2001. Finland: Finnish National Board of Education.
Hisschemöller, M., & Hoppe, R. ( 1996). Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis. Knowledge and Policy, 8 (4), 40– 60.
Hoppe, R., & Pranger, R. ( 1993). Cultural bias and regulating risky technologies: The Dutch debate on regulating LPG-related activities. In T. Brante, et al. (Ed.), Controversial sciences: From content to contention (pp. 275– 300). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Huitema, D. ( 2002). Some insights from environmental policy and their relevance for educational policies. In D. F. Westerheijden (Ed.), Steering with quality: Towards a next generation of quality assurance in higher education, in press.
Jeliazkova, M. I. ( 2002). Running the maze: Interpreting review recommendations. Quality in Higher Education, 8 (1), 89– 96.
Jenniskens, I. G. M. ( 1997). Governmental steering and curriculum innovation: A comparative study of the relationship between governmental steering instruments and innovations in higher education curricula. Maarssen: Elsevier/De Tijdstroom.
Kakebeeke, W. J. ( 1994). Nederland in het internationale milieuveld. In P Glasbergen (Ed.), Milieubeleid Een beleidswetenschappelijke inleiding (pp. 341– 358). Den Haag: VUGA.
Lafferty, W. M. ( 1996). Democracy in an ecological state: Problems and prospects, paper prepared for the conference on “The ecological state” Seville, 28 November–1 December.
Leroy, P. ( 1994). De ontwikkeling van het mielieubeleid en de milieubeleidstheorie. In P. Glasbergen (Eds.), Milieubeleid. Een beleidswetenschappelijke inleiding (pp. 35– 58). Den Haag: VUGA.
Magelhães, A. M. ( 2001). Higher education dilemmas and the quest for identity: Politics, knowledge and education in an era of transition [s.l.].
McNay, I. ( 1997). The impact of the 1992 research assessment exercise in English Universities. Higher Education Review, 29 (2), 34– 43.
Neave, G. ( 1988). On the cultivation of quality, efficiency and enterprise: An overview of recent trends in higher education in Western Europe, 1986–1988. European Journal of Education, 23 (1), 7– 23.
Press, D. ( 1994). Democratic dilemmas in the age of ecology. Trees and toxics in the American West. Durham: Duke University Press.
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. W. ( 1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155– 169.
Scheele, J. P., Maassen, P. A. M., & Westerheijden, D. F. (Eds.) ( 1998). To be continued: Follow-up of quality assurance in higher education Maarssen: Elsevier/De Tijdstroom.
Sursock, A. ( 2001). Towards accreditation schemes for higher education in Europe? Final project report. Geneva, Switzerland: CRE Association of European Universities.
Talib, A. A. ( 2001). The continuing behavioural modification of academics since the 1992 research assessment exercise. Higher Education Review, 33 (3), 30– 46.
The European Higher Education Area and Joint Declaration of the European Ministers of Education, Bologna ( 1999).
Thomas, H. G. ( 2001). Funding mechanism or quality assessment: Responses to the research assessment exercise in English institutions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 23 (2), 171– 179.
United Nations General Assembly ( 1992). Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Annex 1: The Rio Declaration, Rio de Janeiro.
Verkleij, A. C. L., & Westerheijden, D. F. ( 2002). Some elements of the design space for quality assurance in higher education systems. In D. F. Westerheijden (Ed.), Steering with quality: Towards a next generation of quality assurance in higher education, in press.
van Vught, F. A. ( 1994). Intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of quality assessment in higher education. In D. F. Westerheijden, J. Brennan, & P. A. M. Maassen (Ed.), Changing contexts of quality assessment: Recent trends in West European higher education (pp. 31– 50). Utrecht: Lemma.
van Vught, F. A., & Westerheijden, D. F. ( 1994). Towards a general model of quality assessment in higher education. Higher Education, 28, 355– 371.
van der Wende, M. C., & Westerheijden, D. F. ( 2001). International aspects of quality assurance with a special focus on European higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 7 (3), 233– 245.
Westerheijden, D. F. ( 2001). Ex oriente lux? National and multiple accreditation in Europe after the fall of the wall and after Bologna. Quality in Higher Education, 7 (1), 65– 75.
Westerheijden, D. F., & van der Wende, M. ( 2001). Who says B also has to say A? From Bologna to accreditation: Design requirements for quality assurance in Europe. Paper presented at the INQAAHE conference, Bangalore (19–22.3).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huitema, D., Jeliazkova, M. & Westerheijden, D. Phases, levels and circles in policy development: the cases of higher education and environmental quality assurance. High Educ Policy 15, 197–215 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0952-8733(02)00007-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0952-8733(02)00007-7