Higher education: a public good or a commodity for trade? (original) (raw)
Related papers
The public/private divide in higher education: A global revision
Higher Education, 2007
Our common understandings of the public/private distinction in higher education are drawn from neo-classical economics and/or statist political philosophy. However, the development of competition and markets at the national level, and the new potentials for private and public goods created by globalisation in higher education, have exposed weaknesses in the traditional notions of public/private. For example, (1) the statist notion that higher education is always/already a public good blinds us to its role in producing scarce positional private goods, even in free systems; (2) because there is no global state, both statists and neo-liberals model the global higher education environment simply as a trading environment without grasping the potential for global public goods in education -goods that are subject to non-rivalry or non-excludability, and broadly available across populations, on a global scale. Yet higher education in one nation has the potential to create positive and negative externalities in another; and all higher education systems and institutions can benefit from collective systems e.g. that facilitate cross-border recognition and mobility. The paper sets out to revise public/ private in higher education. Rather than defining public/private in terms of legal ownership, it focuses on the social character of the goods. It argues that public/private goods are not always zero sum and under certain conditions provide conditions of possibility for each other. It proposes (a) units in national government that focus specifically on cross-border effects; (b) global policy spaces -taking in state agencies, individual universities, NGOs and commercial agents -to consider the augmentation, distribution of and payment for global public goods.
The Higher Education a Private or a Public Good?
Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies
This paper aims to treat the views that see the higher education as private or a public good. Many countries based in liberal and neoliberal theories have started to see the higher education as private good. They see the higher education as market of a capitalist kind when demand and supply arrange each other. The supply is the high education, offered from universities and the demand has to do with people that want to take this education. This relation is treated as business where the consumer pays for the product. The education has a price that is paid by the subject that buys it. This view is criticized by other, which think higher education is a public good because all society benefits for it. Questions that arise are; Does the public benefits from higher education? Is it the education more expensive than the benefit? Is the high education a profitable business as other business or not? Must the states continuous to subsidize the higher education or not? What can happen if the state will treat the high education as business? Those are some of the question that will take answer in this paper. The method of work is based in analyses of theories and practices that are known in higher education.
The Genesis and Growth of Commercialization of Higher Education
Globalization has integrated the world into one. It is closer integration of national economies by removing barriers. It is based on market mechanism, which does not include the concerns for value.From the economic perspective, neo-liberalism is linked to globalization in terms of freedom of commerce or to free trade. The globalization phenomenon in the latter part of the twentieth century had a profound impact on higher education and the basis has shifted from a traditional welfare approach to a more privatized, market-oriented approach.All over the world, since the beginning of the 1990's,
Higher Education As An International Public Good And GATS: A Paradox?
The reform of higher education in Europe in the wake of the Bologna Declaration can on the one hand be seen as an effort by the European political world to construct some kind of regional public good in this field. On the other hand the United States and its allies such as Australia and New Zealand are, in the talks of the Millennium Round, trying to bring (higher) education under the rules of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). This effort reflects the conviction that higher education must be seen as a private good. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the nature of higher education in terms of the discussion on public good vs private good. Higher education clearly has public as well as private ingredients. A number of questions can be deducted from this fact. This paper will try to give the beginning of an answer to these questions. The structure of the paper is as follows. In the first paragraph a definition is given of international public goods. Higher education is then analysed from the perspective of this definition. The second paragraph considers the European policy towards creating a higher education system in Europe in the framework of a regional public goods approach. Consideration is given to those public and private aspects of higher education which follow from the analysis in paragraph 1. In the third paragraph higher education is set in the framework of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. The fourth paragraph tries to make some concluding remarks about the paradox which is the core issue of this paper.
Center For Studies in Higher Education, 2009
In the United States, developing human capital for both economic and social benefit is an idea as old as the nation itself and led to the emergence of world's first mass higher education system. Now most other nations are racing to expand access to universities and colleges and to expand their role in society. Higher education is growing markedly in its importance for building a culture of aspiration and, in turn, the formation of human capital, the promotion of socioeconomic mobility, and the determination of national economic competitiveness. This paper outlines a convergence of approaches toward building what I call "Structured Opportunity Markets" (SOM) in higher education-including diversified providers and expanding enrollment and program capacity. Increasingly, higher education systems in developed and developing nations, and in some cases, supranational entities such as the European Union and emerging cooperation among nations in South East Asia, will move to most if not all of the components of SOM, in part influenced by a global process of policy transfer. Those nations and regions that do not pursue major components of SOM will be compelled to present rational arguments in both domestic and international forums as to why they are not adopting some aspects of the model. The paper concludes by arguing that while the US offers structural and operational models for many evolving national higher education systems, the EU offers important insights on how to pursue higher education reform in the modern and increasingly competitive global context. A first priority for countries should be to develop a comprehensive and coherent vision for the future of tertiary education, to guide future policy development over the medium and long term in harmony with national social and economic objectives.-Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society, IMHE OECD June 2008 * This research paper reflects a pending chapter in the book Access, Equity and Capacity in Asia Pacific Higher Education (forthcoming Palgrave Macmillan), edited by Deane E. Neubauer and Yoshiro Tanaka and a presentation made at an international conference held at Cheng Chung University-Taiwan co-sponsored by the East West Center; a summary of its themes was published earlier in the online Global University Network for Innovation newsletter (UNESCO). My thanks for the input of Richard Edelstein, Xu Dan, Ma Wanhua, Roger Brown, and Pat Pelfrey on earlier drafts.
The' Market for Higher Education: Does it Really Exist?
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2009
Higher education, like any other commodity or service, has been viewed in a variety of economic frameworks. Little of this work, however, appears to have made any effort to define carefully the boundaries of the relevant market for higher education, which is the subject of this particular inquiry. Market definition is an essential preliminary step before any academic or policy investigation can properly be made into the forces that determine the behavior of the buyers and sellers of higher education, those who provide inputs into the education process, or those who fund or otherwise subsidize it. The authors spell out the key economic dimensions of a market, and illustrate their relevance for research that seeks to analyze the players and policies in the many distinct domestic and international markets that exist for the inputs and outputs of the higher education sector.
The Perils of Commercialization of Higher Education
Commercialization is driven by market and profit motives. The commercialization of higher education has been taking place all over the world since the beginning of the 1990's. Under the GATS regime, education was included, and ever since then, is viewed as a tradable commodity. Almost all nations of the world succumbed to International Monetary Fund (IMF) -World Bank agenda of providing a platform for trade in higher education as a solution to resolve the crisis in higher education in the era of fiscal constraints. Since then, commercialization of higher education is being vigorously pursued in both the developed as well as the developing countries of the world and it has become a government supported service through widespread privatization and deregulation. A significant consequence of commercialization of higher education is that students see themselves as customer and education as a product. This is an instrumental view of education, as its value does not lie in itself, but in what it can be used to gain. When education is commercialized, the entire purpose of producing organic intellectuals with independent and non-parasitic thinking is defeated. This paper puts forth the arguments on why education cannot be treated as a commodity and it is something that should remain outside the purview of the market ideology.
The Marketization of Higher Education
Higher education initially a government –supported service has entered the marketplace. Many countries have encompassed the notion of marketization of higher education. A commodity economy driven by market ideology has motivated the students to perceive higher education as a medium to gain meaningful employment, attain professional growth and social status. Universities are big businesses that are aggressively marketing themselves to turn into a brand. Funding of higher education is transferring gradually from the government to the students. Market ethic as an ideological force in higher education policy though has enhanced the participation rates, but the equity in educational opportunities has come under threat. Another challenge that higher education systems across the world face is that of quality education. It is important both economically and on equity grounds, for increasing the number of government funded universities as against private higher education institutions several of which provide education of debatable quality.