Cargando…

In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities

The political science doctoral thesis project is focussing on comparing university policies with the background of different welfare state types: Austria as a conservative-corporatist, Finland as a social democratic and Scotland as a liberal welfare state. As universities are pre-constitutional enti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Stransky-Can, Kajetan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8904160/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00881-z
_version_ 1784664896525303808
author Stransky-Can, Kajetan
author_facet Stransky-Can, Kajetan
author_sort Stransky-Can, Kajetan
collection PubMed
description The political science doctoral thesis project is focussing on comparing university policies with the background of different welfare state types: Austria as a conservative-corporatist, Finland as a social democratic and Scotland as a liberal welfare state. As universities are pre-constitutional entities, it seems to be legitimate to search for fit from welfare state policy-making with the practices of university steering. Here, I will present paradigm evidence of top-down-oriented New Public Management (NPM) and bottom-up-formed Network Governance (NG) at a macro-level, i.e. governance by the state. The paradigms connect with the theme of institutional autonomy, which differentiates into an academic, a financial, an organisational and a staffing aspect. As a result, I propose the following hypothesis for the cases of Austria, Finland and Scotland: NPM is present, but not dominant in higher education (HE) policies. More likely, NPM and NG appear simultaneously within the university policies of Austria, Finland and Scotland. How do these paradigms transfer within the institutions? In this article, a concept for this transfer of action in horizontal autonomy to actors in vertical autonomy through communication and through management committees’ interplay elaborates and, additionally, hypotheses formulate. The extent of the space for alternative paradigms to join the paradigm transfer game, for example, for Epistemic Governance (EG), might be larger, the higher the regulative density of university policies is. The borders of every paradigm in university policy, however, constitute with (a) strong welfare state traditions for governance and (b) strong university traditions for steering. Conservative-corporatist welfare state tradition as in Austria shows an inclination for university policy governance to be control-oriented, whereas social democratic welfare state tradition as in Finland relies on trust in university policy formulation (and implementation). It has to remain open how the liberal welfare state of Scotland would classify.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8904160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89041602022-03-09 In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities Stransky-Can, Kajetan J Knowl Econ Article The political science doctoral thesis project is focussing on comparing university policies with the background of different welfare state types: Austria as a conservative-corporatist, Finland as a social democratic and Scotland as a liberal welfare state. As universities are pre-constitutional entities, it seems to be legitimate to search for fit from welfare state policy-making with the practices of university steering. Here, I will present paradigm evidence of top-down-oriented New Public Management (NPM) and bottom-up-formed Network Governance (NG) at a macro-level, i.e. governance by the state. The paradigms connect with the theme of institutional autonomy, which differentiates into an academic, a financial, an organisational and a staffing aspect. As a result, I propose the following hypothesis for the cases of Austria, Finland and Scotland: NPM is present, but not dominant in higher education (HE) policies. More likely, NPM and NG appear simultaneously within the university policies of Austria, Finland and Scotland. How do these paradigms transfer within the institutions? In this article, a concept for this transfer of action in horizontal autonomy to actors in vertical autonomy through communication and through management committees’ interplay elaborates and, additionally, hypotheses formulate. The extent of the space for alternative paradigms to join the paradigm transfer game, for example, for Epistemic Governance (EG), might be larger, the higher the regulative density of university policies is. The borders of every paradigm in university policy, however, constitute with (a) strong welfare state traditions for governance and (b) strong university traditions for steering. Conservative-corporatist welfare state tradition as in Austria shows an inclination for university policy governance to be control-oriented, whereas social democratic welfare state tradition as in Finland relies on trust in university policy formulation (and implementation). It has to remain open how the liberal welfare state of Scotland would classify. Springer US 2022-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8904160/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00881-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Stransky-Can, Kajetan
In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title_full In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title_fullStr In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title_full_unstemmed In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title_short In Between New Public Management and Network Governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential Conflicts in Autonomy Understandings of Governments and Universities
title_sort in between new public management and network governance in austria, finland and scotland: potential conflicts in autonomy understandings of governments and universities
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8904160/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00881-z
work_keys_str_mv AT stranskycankajetan inbetweennewpublicmanagementandnetworkgovernanceinaustriafinlandandscotlandpotentialconflictsinautonomyunderstandingsofgovernmentsanduniversities