Abstract
In this paper the authors argue that the use of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the implementation of the Bologna process presents coordination problems that do not allow for the full coherence of the results. As the process is quite complex, involving three different levels (European, national and local) and as the final actors in the implementation process higher education institutions (HEIs) have considerable degree of autonomy, assuming that the implementation of Bologna is a top–down linear policy implementation process does not account for the developments taking place, which produce implementation difficulties at several different levels. Constraints resulting from economic concerns at European and national levels may be an obstacle for the Bologna’s contribution to a social Europe.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
de la Porte (2002) defines benchmarking as “evaluating performance on the basis of a benchmark, which can be conceived as a yardstick against which reality can be measured diachronically and comparatively” (ibid.: 42).
The institutional data emerges from two research projects: The first aims at monitoring the implementation of Bologna in twelve European universities (six Italian universities and one from each of six different European countries – France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom). The second (HEIGLO) aims to identify and analyse higher education’s response to the challenges of Europeanization, internationalisation and globalisation and the (supra) national contexts, the organisational settings, and the policies and activities aimed to support this response.
Austria, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom.
References
Bergen Communiqué. (2005). The European higher education area—achieving the goals: Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education.
Bologna Follow-up Group. (2005). From Berlin to Bergen. Bergen.
Cerych, L., & Sabatier, P. (1986). Great expectations and mixed performance: The implementation of higher education reforms in Europe. Trentham: European Institute of Education and Social Policy.
Clancy, P. (2004). The non-university sector in Irish higher education. In Proceedings of International Seminar about the role of polytechnics in higher education. Leiria, Portugal: Instituto Politécnico de Leiria.
de la Porte, C. (2002). Is the open method of coordination appropriate for organizing activities at European level in sensitive policy areas? European Law Journal, 8, 38–58.
Dehousse, R. (2002). The open method of coordination: a new policy paradigm? Paper presented at the First Pan-European Conference on European Union Politic—“The Politics of European Integration: Academic Acquis and Future Challenges”, Bordeaux, 26–28 September 2002.
ESIB. (2005a). The black book of the Bologna process. Bergen.
ESIB. (2005b). Bologna with student eyes. Bergen.
European Commission. (2004). Implementation of "Education & Training 2010" work programme—Making the best use of resources. Brussels: Working Group E––European Commission.
Frølich, N., & Stensaker, B. (2005). Academic, economic and development strategies—internationalisation of Norwegian higher education institutions. In J. Huisman & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II: Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Fulton, O., Amaral, A., & Veiga, A. (2004). Report of site visits of an external monitoring team to the University Ca’ Foscari (Venice) and the University of Urbino, Monitoring the harmonisation process of tertiary education systems in some countries of the European Union (follow up of the Bologna and Prague Conferences) with specific reference to the Italian reform.
Goetschy, J. (2004). The open method of coordination and the Lisbon strategy: the difficult road from potentials results. Paper presented at the IRA 7th European Congress, Estoril, 7–11 September 2004.
Gornitzka, A. (2005). Coordinating policies for a “Europe of knowledge”: Emerging practices of the “Open method of coordination” in education and research. University of Oslo: ARENA – Centre for European Studies.
Gornitzka, A., Kyvik, S., & Stensaker, B. (2005). Implementation analysis in higher education. In A. Gornitzka, M. Kogan, & A. Amaral (Eds.), Reform and change in higher education (Vol. 8). Dordrecht: Springer.
Hahn, K. (2005). German universities in the process of globalisation, Europeanisation and internationalisation. In J. Huisman, & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II: Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation. Bonn:Lemmens.
Knill, C., & Lehmkhul, D. (1999). How Europe matters. Different mechanisms of Europeanization [Electronic Version]. EIoP, 3 from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1999-007a.htm.
Kok, W. (2004). Facing the challenge – the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment. Luxembourg: European Communities.
Kontgiannopoulou-Poydorides, G., Stamelos, G., & Papadakis, N. (2005). Internationalisation and academic hierarchies in Greece: Culture, power and agency. In J. Huisman, & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II: Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Luijten-Lub, A., Huisman, J., & van der Wende, M. (2005). Conclusions, reflections and recommendations. In J. Huisman & M. van der Wende (Eds.), On competition and cooperation II: Institutional responses to Europeanisation, internationalisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43, 281–309.
Neave, G. (2005). On snowballs, slopes and the process of Bologna: Some testy reflections on the advance of higher education in Europe. University of Oslo: ARENA – Centre for European Studies.
PA Consulting Group. (2004). Survival of the fittest: A survey on the leadership of strategic change in higher education. London.
Pfeffer, T., Thomas, J., & Obiltschnig, B. (2005). Austrian higher education institutions go international. In J. Huisman, & M. van der Wende (Eds.), On competition and cooperation II: Institutional responses to Europeanisation, internationalisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Pierson, P. (1996). The path of European integration: A historical institutionalist analysis. Comparative Political Studies, 29, 123–163.
Radaelli, C. (2003). The open method of coordination: A new governance architecture of the European Union? Stockholm: SIEPS—Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies.
Reichert, S., & Tauch, C. (2005). Trends IV: European universities implementing Bologna. European University Association.
Rodrigues, M. J. (2004). An overview of the Lisbon strategy—the European agenda for competitiveness, employment and social cohesion. Paper presented at the Konferenz des Kompetenzteams Wirtschaft: So profitiert Osterreich Ares-Tower, Wien, 17 September 2004.
Schäfer, A. (2004). Beyond the community method: Why the open method of coordination was introduced to EU policy-making [Electronic Version]. EIoP, 8 from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-013a.htm.
Schwarz-Hahn, S., & Rehburg, M. (2004). Bachelor and master degrees in Germany: A true reform or just partial changes?. Centre for Research on Higher Education and Work, University of Kassel.
Scott, W. R. (2003). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Teichler, U. (2004). Interview by Amélia Veiga conducted for the PhD project. Lisbon.
van der Wende, M., & Huisman, J. (2004). Europe. In J. Huisman & M. van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition: National and European policies for the internationalisation of higher education. Bonn: Lemmens.
Veiga, A., Rosa, M., & Amaral, A. (2005). Institutional internationalisation strategies in a context of state inefficiency. In J. Huisman & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II: Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Williams, G., & Evans, J. (2005). English university responses to globalisation, internationalisation and Europeanisation. In J. Huisman & M. Van der Wende (Eds.), On cooperation and competition II Institutional responses to internationalisation, Europeanisation and globalisation. Bonn: Lemmens.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Veiga, A., Amaral, A. The open method of coordination and the implementation of the Bologna process. Tert Educ Manag 12, 283–295 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-006-9005-4
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-006-9005-4