H uman capital theory in recent decades has become the basis for educational policy in many developed countries. Expert discussions, however, often undervalue research findings and developments related to this theory that since the 1970s have consistently enriched understanding of how human capital contributes to personal well-being and socioeconomic development of society as a whole. Educational policy lags behind these elaborations, which leads to a decline in the impact of education upon development worldwide. In the 21st century, fundamentally new trends in socioeconomic dynamics pose unprecedented challenges for educational systems around the world, including Russia. Despite the quantitative growth of money and time spent on education, performance per unit of education costs has fallen. The human potential, created by education, is facing more and more difficulties in its capitalization: economic growth is slowing down at both at the country level and globally. This situation brings to life new attempts to claim insignificance of education for economic growth and for individual success. So far, these attempts have not been very influential in educational policy, but in many countries, such arguments already serve as a backdrop for budget decisions that are detrimental for education. Educational systems need to complement practices that contribute to the development of human capital. In this regard, several theoretical elaborations that have not yet became part of the mainstream discussion on human capital, could be helpful for understanding the role of human capital in socioeconomic progress and possible ways to improve it in the short and long term.

No abstract

No abstract

This chapter introduces the project that aimed at mapping the institutional landscape changes in higher education in 15 post-Soviet countries. The project takes the Soviet legacy as a point of departure and describes and analyses the important developments that took place with the fall of the Soviet system and the impacts these developments had on the landscape. Key developments pertain to, for example, the change from a state-dominated ideology to a steering philosophy with many market elements, finding a new balance between supply and demand, international developments and demographic developments. The landscapes have changed significantly with the emergence of non-state providers, a reconfiguration of “traditional” institutions (universities, academies, institutes) and also a growth in the public sectors of higher education.

No abstract