Abstract
The importance attributed to stakeholder issues in contemporary higher education affairs across the globe is a reflection of the changing nature of the social pact between higher education and society, brokered via the state, with new notions of trust and accountability as well as responsiveness to societal needs and demands as key attributes. This chapter takes stock of the key findings across the BRICS as per the individual contributions presented in part III of this volume.
Keywords
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Consult Giavezzi et al. (2005) for the relation between inflation and debt in Brazil in the period 1999 and 2003.
- 2.
For a thorough analysis of one such regulatory body—the University Grants Committee—see Singh (2004).
- 3.
For a recent discussion on the autonomy enjoyed by Indian universities consult Powar (2002, pp. 160–166).
References
Agarwal, P., & Altbach, P. G. (2012). A half-century of Indian higher education: Essays by Philip G Altbach. New Delhi: SAGE.
Amaral, A., & Magalhães, A. (2002). The emergent role of external stakeholders in European higher education governance. In A. Amaral, G. Jones, & B. Karseth (Eds.), Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance (pp. 1–21). Dordrecht: Springer.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education.
Benneworth, P. (2013). University engagement with socially excluded communities. Drodrecht: Springer.
Benneworth, P., & Jongbloed, B. (2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education, 59(5), 567–588.
Boatright, J. R. (1994). Fiduciary duties and the shareholder-management relation: or, what’s so special about shareholders?. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 393–407.
Chatterton, P., & Goddard, J. (2000). The response of higher education institutions to regional needs. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 475–496.
Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The Stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.
Freeman, R. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giavezzi, F., Goldfajn, I., & Herrera, S. (Eds.). (2005). Inflation targeting, debt, and the Brazilian experience, 1999–2003. Cambridge: MIT.
Gornitzka, A. (1999). Governmental policies and organisational change in higher education. Higher Education, 38(1), 5–31.
Hölttä, S. (2000). From ivory towers to regional networks in Finnish higher education. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 465–474.
Jensen, M. C. (2010). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 22(1), 32–42.
Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.
Jones, T. M., & Wicks, A. C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 206–221.
Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56(3), 303–324.
Kapur, D. (2010). Indian higher education. In C. T. Clotfelter (Ed.), American universities in a global market (pp. 305–334). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kickert, W. (1995). Steering at a Distance: A new paradigm of public governance in Dutch higher education. Governance, 8(1), 135–157.
Larsen, I. M. (2000). University research policy in Norway—walking the tightrope between internal and external interests. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 385–402.
Luescher-Mamashela, T. M. (2010). From university democratisation to managerialism: The changing legitimation of university governance and the place of students. Tertiary Education and Management, 16(4), 259–283.
Maassen, P. (2000a). The changing roles of stakeholders in Dutch university governance. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 449–464.
Maassen, P. (2000b). Editorial. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 377–383.
Maassen, P. (2014). A New Social Contract for Higher Education? In G. Goastellec and F. Picard, (eds.), Higher Education in Societies (pp. 33–50). Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2003). Interpretations of self-regulation: The changing state-higher education relationship in Europe. In R. Begg (Ed.), The dialogue between higher education research and practice (pp. 85–95). Dordecht: Springer.
Magalhães, A., & Amaral, A. (2000). Portuguese higher education and the imaginary friend: The stakeholder’s role in institutional governance. European Journal of Education, 35(4), 439–448.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of management review, 22(4), 853–886.
Neave, G. (2002). The stakeholder perspective historically explored. In J. Enders & O. Fulton (Eds.), Higher education in a globalising world: International trends and mutual observations: A festschrift in honour of Ulrich Teichler (pp. 17–37). Berlin: Springer
Olsen, J. (2005). The institutional dynamics of the (European) university. Working paper No.15. Centre for European Studies. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403–445.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford: Stanford Business Books.
Pinheiro, R., Benneworth, P., & Jones, G. A. (2012). Universities and regional development: A critical assessment of tensions and contradictions. Routledge: Milton Park.
Powar, K. B. (2002). Indian higher education: A conglomerate of concepts, facts and practices. New Delhi: Concepts Publishing Company.
Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612.
Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887–910.
Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy sciences, 21, 129–168.
Scholl, H. (2002). Applying stakeholder theory to e-government. In B. Schmid, K. Stanoevska-Slabeva, & V. Tschammer (Eds.), Towards the E-Society (pp. 735–747). Berlin: Springer.
Schwarz, S., & Teichler, U. (2000). The institutional basis of higher education research: Experiences and perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. New York: Prentice Hall.
Singh, A. (2004). Fifty years of higher education in India: The role of the university grants commission. New Delhi: SAGE.
Stensaker, B., & Harvey, L. (2011). Accountability in higher education: Global perspectives on trust and power. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Tight, M. (2003). Researching higher education. London: Society for Research into Higher Education.
Trow, M. (2000). From mass higher education to universal access: the American advantage. Research and Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.1.00. Centre for Studies in Higher Education, Berkeley: University of California.
van Vught, F. (1988). A new autonomy in European higher education? An exploration and analysis of the strategy of self-regulation in higher education governance. International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, 12(1), 16–26.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pinheiro, R. (2015). The Role of Internal and External Stakeholders. In: Schwartzman, S., Pinheiro, R., Pillay, P. (eds) Higher Education in the BRICS Countries. Higher Education Dynamics, vol 44. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9570-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9570-8_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9569-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9570-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)