Advertisement

Conflicting Rationalities: Mergers and Consolidations in Swedish Higher Education Policy

  • Mats BennerEmail author
  • Lars Geschwind
Part of the Higher Education Dynamics book series (HEDY, volume 46)

Abstract

This chapter analyses the preconditions and forms of consolidation in the Swedish higher education system over the last decade. After a rapid development and expansion of the system between 1994 and 2004, there have been several initiatives to consolidate and streamline the sector. There have been few direct interventions intended to trigger reorganisations, mergers and acquisitions; instead, the political system has primarily incentivised universities to seek new organisational models and arrangements. This means that the reorganisation of the higher education system has been marked by experimentation with several different models and initiatives, to determine which models have the best fit with the parties involved. With the advent of a new government in 2014, the issue of mergers has been discarded and universities are again primarily seeking to restore and ascertain their independence. Hence, we analyse mergers in Swedish higher education as a game between rational actors aiming to clarify the gains and potential losses of mergers – rather than a top-down process of forced reorganisations as in many other countries.

Keywords

High Education High Education Institution High Education System Funding Stream High Education Governance 
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.

References

  1. Benner, M. (2001). Kontrovers och konsensus. Nora: Nya Doxa.Google Scholar
  2. Benner, M. (2008). Kunskapsnation i kris? Nora: Nya Doxa.Google Scholar
  3. Bienenstock, A., Schwaag Serger, S., Benner, M., & Lidgard, A. (2014). Combining excellence in education, research and impact. Stockholm: SNS.Google Scholar
  4. Broström, A., Deiaco, E., & Melin, G. (2005). Vägval för Örebro universitet och Mälardalens högskola. Utredning av förutsättningar för fusion, allians eller annan samverkan (SISTER report 2005:38). Stockholm: SISTER.Google Scholar
  5. Deiaco, E., Broström, A., & Geschwind, L. (2007). Högskola och region – ett trevande förhållande. Reflektioner over exemplet Västra Götalandsregionen (SISTER Working Paper 2007:61).Google Scholar
  6. Ekberg, T. (2011). SU+KI+KTH =?. En studie om förutsättningar för ett mer systematiserat samarbete mellan universiteten i Stockholm.Google Scholar
  7. Ekholm, L. (2008). Ett stycke svensk utbildningshistoria? Utvärdering av samgåendet mellan Lärarhögskolan i Stockholm och Stockholms universitet.Google Scholar
  8. Geschwind, L., & Melin, G. (2011). Linnéuniversitetets tillkomst. En studie av fusionsprocessen. Stockholm: Technopolis.Google Scholar
  9. Geschwind, L., & Pinheiro, R. (2014, September 3–6). Raising the summit or flattening the agora? The Elitist Turn in Science Policy in Northern Europe. Paper presented at ECPR General Conference University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  10. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  11. Mann, M. (1994). In praise of macro-sociology. British Journal of Sociology, 45(1), 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mayntz, R. (1983). The conditions of effective public policy. Policy and Politics, 2(11), 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Melin, G. (2013). Ett nytt universitetLinnéuniversitetets tre första år (A new university – Linnaeus University’s first three years). Stockholm: Technopolis.Google Scholar
  14. Melin, G., Fridholm, T., & Ärenman, E. (2013). Erfarenheter av lärosätesfusioner i Sverige och Danmark (Experiences of university mergers in Sweden and Denmark). Stockholm: Technopolis.Google Scholar
  15. Mouzelis, N. (1995). Sociological theory. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Røvik, K. A. (2000). Moderna organisationer. Stockholm: Liber.Google Scholar
  17. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
  18. SOU. (1989:27). (Swedish Government Commission Report 1989:27). Forskning vid de mindre och medelstora högskolorna.Google Scholar
  19. SRC (Swedish Research Council). (2012). The Swedish production of highly cited papers. Stockholm: SRC.Google Scholar
  20. Stockholm: Universitetshuvudstaden. (2010). Stockholm: Universitetshuvudstaden. Utbildning, forskning och utveckling med Karolinska Institutet, Kungliga Tekniska högskolan och Stockholms universitet i samverkan. Available at: http://www.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.10728.1294219924!/menu/standard/file/KI%2BKTH%2BSU_slutgiltig.pdf
  21. Sundqvist, B. (2010). Svenska universitet – elfenbenstorn eller politiska instrument? Hedemora: Gidlunds.Google Scholar
  22. Sydsvenska Dagbladet, 2012-12-03. “Lunds universitet vill tala om samgåenden”.Google Scholar
  23. Universitetsläraren, 20-2008.“Kan bli stora konsekvenser för anställda vid utbildningarna, sager utredaren Sigbrit Franke”.Google Scholar
  24. van Vught, F. A. (Ed.). (1989). Governmental strategies and innovation in higher education. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  25. Wittrock, B. (1993). The modern university: The three transformations. In S. Rothblatt & B. Wittrock (Eds.), The European and American university since 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and ManagementLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Department of Learning, School of Education and Communication in Engineering ScienceKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations