A key feature of higher education governance arrangements around the world is their apparent convergence, at least in formal terms. Certain global models, such as the so-called New Public Management (NPM), appear to have considerable traction (King, 2009, p. 41). Nonetheless, we need to be careful. Models — such as those configured around the preference by higher education policy-makers for increased institutional freedoms and performance accountability — are dynamic entities. They change in the processes of adoption and implementation, as negotiation by affected groups, the historical path ‘dependencies’ of particular nations, and as varying cultural interpretations come to exert their influences. Formal governance arrangements that emphasize institutional autonomy and accountability in one country, for example, may look very different in practice to those found in other countries with apparently similar policies and structures.


High Education Academic Freedom High Education System External Quality Assurance Public Accountability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bourdieu, P. (1990) Homo Academicus (Cambridge: Polity Press).Google Scholar
  2. Bowen, W. (2013) Higher Education in the Digital Age (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carey, K. (2010) Accountability in American Higher Education (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, B. (1983) The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  5. Commission of the European Communities (2006) Delivering on the Modernization Agenda for Universities: Education, Research and Innovation. COM 208 final, May.Google Scholar
  6. Commission of the European Universities (2007) The European Research Area: New Perspectives. COM 161 final, April.Google Scholar
  7. Cummings, W., Locke, W. and D. Fisher (2010) ‘Faculty perceptions of government and management’, International Higher Education, 60(Summer), 3–5.Google Scholar
  8. Dill, D. D. (in press) ‘Academic quality and academic responsibility: a critical reflection on collegial governance’, in P. John and J. Fanghanel (eds) Dimensions of Marketization in Higher Education (New York and London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  9. Dill, D. D (2005) ‘The degradation of the academic ethic: teaching, research and the renewal of professional self-regulation’, in R. Barnett (ed) Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research, Scholarship and Teaching (Maidenhead: SRHE/Open University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Dowdle, M. (2006) ‘Introduction’, in M. Dowdle (ed) Public Accountability: Designs, Dilemmas, and Experiences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  11. Enders, J., de Boer, H. and E. Weyer (2013) ‘Regulatory autonomy and performance: the reform of higher education re-visited’, Higher Education, 65, 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Estermann, T. and T. Nokkala (2009) University Autonomy in Europe 1: Exploratory Study (Brussels: European Universities Association).Google Scholar
  13. Ferlie, E., Musselin, C. and L. Andresani (2008) ‘The “Steering” of higher education systems: a public management perspective’, Higher Education, 56(3), September, 325–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Freeman, J. (2006) ‘Extending public accountability through privatization: from public law to publicization’, in M. Dowdle (ed) Public Accountability: Designs, Dilemmas, and Experiences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  15. Grewal, D. (2008) Network Power: The Social Dynamics of Globalization (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  16. Hood, C. (2004) ‘Conclusion: making sense of controls over government’, in C. Hood, O. James, B. G. Peters and C. Scott (eds) Controlling Modern Government: Variety, Commonality and Change (pp. 185–205) (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kealey, T. (2009) Sex, Science and Profits (London: Vintage Books).Google Scholar
  18. Kim, T. (2011) ‘Globalization and higher education in South Korea: towards ethnocentric internationalization or global commercialization of higher education?’, in R. King, S. Marginson and R. Naidoo (eds) Handbook on Globalization and Higher Education (pp. 286–305) (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
  19. King, R. (2007) The Regulatory State in an Age of Governance: Soft Words and Big Sticks (Basingstoke: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. King, R. (2009) Governing Universities Globally: Organizations, Regulation and Rankings (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. King, R. (2011) ‘Governing knowledge globally’, in R. King, S. Marginson and R. Naidoo (eds) Handbook on Globalization and Higher Education (pp. 415–437) (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kogan, M. and S. Hanney (2000) Reforming Higher Education (London: Jessica Kingsley).Google Scholar
  23. Liu, J. and X. Wang (2010) ‘Expansion and differentiation in Chinese higher education’, International Higher Education, 60(August), 7–8.Google Scholar
  24. Marginson, S. (2010) ‘Confucian values’, Times Higher Education, 17 June.Google Scholar
  25. Marginson, S. and M. van der Wende (2007) Globalization and Higher Education (Paris: OECD).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCluskey, R. L. and M. L. Winter (2012) The Idea of the Digital University: Ancient Traditions, Disruptive Technologies and the Battle for the Soul of Higher Education (Washington, DC: Westphalia Press).Google Scholar
  27. McGregor, R. (2010) The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers (London: Penguin).Google Scholar
  28. Merton, R. (1942/1996) On Social Structure and Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  29. Naidoo, R. (2004) ‘Fields and institution strategy: Bourdieu on the relationship between higher education, inequality and society’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(4), 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neave, G. (1988) ‘On being economical with university autonomy: being an account of the retrospective joys of a written constitution’, in M. Tight (ed) Academic Freedom and Responsibility (pp. 31–48) (Buckingham: Open University Press).Google Scholar
  31. Neave, G. (2006) ‘The evaluative state and Bologna: old wine in new bottles or simply the ancient practice of coupage’, Higher Education Forum, 3(March), 27–46.Google Scholar
  32. Olsen, J. (2007) ‘The institutional dynamics of the European university’, in P. Maassen and J. Olsen (eds) University Dynamics and European Integration (pp. 25–54) (Dordrecht: Springer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Neave, G. (2008) ‘From guardian to overseer: trends in institutional autonomy, governance, and leadership’, in A. Amaral (ed) Reforma do Ensino Superior (Lisbon: Conselho Nacional de Educacao).Google Scholar
  34. Neave, G. (2009) ‘Institutional autonomy 2010–2020. A tale of Elan — two steps back to make one very large leap forward’, in B. Kehm, J. Huisman and B. Stensaker (eds) The European Higher Education Area: Perspectives on a Moving Target (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers).Google Scholar
  35. O’Malley, P. (2004) Risk, Uncertainty and Government (Oxon: Routledge-Cavendish).Google Scholar
  36. O’Malley, P. (2008) ‘Governmentality and risk’, in J. Zinn (ed) Social Theories of Risk and Uncertainty (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
  37. Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parsons, T. and G. Platt (1973) The American University (Boston: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Polanyi, K. (1962) ‘The republic of science: its political and economic theory’, Minerva, 1, 54–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Popper, K. (1945) The Open Society and Its Enemies (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  41. Scott, C. (2006) ‘Spontaneous accountability’, in M. Dowdle (ed) Public Accountability: Designs, Dilemmas and Experiences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  42. Stensaker, B. (2011) Accountability in Higher Education: Global Perspectives on Trust and Power (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  43. Wagner, C. (2008) The New Invisible College: Science for Development (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Roger King 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger King

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations