State Support for Higher Education

Li, Amy Y.; Zumeta, William

doi:10.1007/978-1-137-45617-5_25

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The policy layer also deals with politics, i.e. the processes and negotiations that decide goals, priorities (Thurmaier and Willoughby, 2001), funding levels (Li and Zumeta, 2015) and the distribution of funding between different types of performers and agencies (Tandberg, 2010;Weerts and Ronca, 2012). While several chapters deal with priority setting and the underlying rationales, such as Coburn, Yaqub, and Chataway (Chapter 10), this Handbook does not include a chapter on the politics of public research funding, i.e.…”

Section: The Policy Design Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While several chapters deal with priority setting and the underlying rationales, such as Coburn, Yaqub, and Chataway (Chapter 10), this Handbook does not include a chapter on the politics of public research funding, i.e. how actors' interests and power influence the competition for funding between science policy and other policy domains (Thurmaier and Willoughby, 2001;Li and Zumeta, 2015). Such a chapter might have explored why changes in policy rationales and funding instruments do not necessarily imply shifts in the final allocation of funding, noting how the relative power of the involved actors shapes outcomes.…”

Section: The Policy Design Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introduction to the Handbook of Public Funding of Research: understanding vertical and horizontal complexities

Lepori¹,

Jongbloed²,

Hicks³

2023

Handbook of Public Funding of Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESScientific research requires resources -financial, human, infrastructural, legal, social, and cultural, whose provision is an ever more expensive and complex undertaking. This Handbook explores the financing of scientific research by national governments and the European Union. Since WWII, the increasing importance of knowledge for society and the economy has encouraged governments to adopt research policy and funding as a 'new' core task of the state. Research policy bridges the state and the science system (Guston, 2000) mainly through the distribution of public subsidies (Braun and Gilardi, 2006). According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates, OECD governments spent $497 billion on research and development in 2020, an amount that has doubled over the past 15 years (OECD, 2021). This expanding commitment speaks to governments' hopes that research will support economic growth, create jobs, enhance social welfare, protect the environment, and expand the frontiers of human knowledge.The level of public resources invested in science differs between countries (Larrue et al., 2018) depending on the challenges the country faces, its government's ambitions, and political leaders' beliefs about the function of the state in research and innovation systems -on how much direction should be given by the state and how much funding should be made available for which objectives (and challenges). This Handbook discusses the underlying ideas and rationales for investing public funds in the research activities carried out by universities, public research organizations (PROs), and government labs. It compares the political economy of science funding (e.g. Martin and Nightingale, 2000) and the various coordination roles governments play in research funding systems (Lepori, 2011) to better understand countries' research funding regimes.Government provides research funding to universities, the leading research performers, as recurrent funds, selective, competitive funds, or combinations of the two. Various governmental agencies working at (or in-between) different levels, semi-public organizations, and research councils are involved in deciding on research resources and the purposes and conditions attached (Larrue et al., 2018). This Handbook analyses the types and channels of funding, modalities to distribute funds, eligibility requirements, and other conditions connected to the research funds. The chapters also discuss how resource allocation functions at the level of the research performers -the universities, PROs, research groups, and individual researchers -and what strategies these entities employ in reaction to trends and reforms in their funding environment. Universities and PROs are encouraged to generate and (to different degrees) compete for these financial resources (Krücken, 2021). However, they are increasingly

show abstract

Section: The Policy Design Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Policy Design Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the Handbook of Public Funding of Research: understanding vertical and horizontal complexities

Lepori¹,

Jongbloed²,

Hicks³

2023

Handbook of Public Funding of Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Performance funding for higher education is a budgeting model that links state funding to the performance of public colleges on selected student outcomes (Burke & Minassians, 2004). In the face of increasing tuition prices and mounting student loan debt, performance funding has become a prevalent policy tool intended to promote accountability and efficiency in public higher education and improve student access, retention, and graduation (Dougherty & Natow, 2015; Li & Zumeta, 2015, 2016). Presently, at least 32 states operate, are implementing, or plan to implement a performance funding policy (National Conference of State Legislatures [NCSL], 2015; Snyder & Fox, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Funding Policy Impacts on STEM Degree Attainment

2018

Educational Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance funding policies for higher education allocate appropriations to public institutions based on student outcomes such as degree completions. This study investigates whether a special science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) incentive in 13 state performance funding policies leads to greater undergraduate degree completions in STEM fields. This study applies a conceptual framework of principal–agent theory and anticipatory policy effects. Incorporating a panel data set on 551 public 4-year institutions from 2003-2004 to 2014-2015, results from difference-in-differences analyses suggest that the STEM incentive increases total STEM bachelor’s degrees completed as well as STEM bachelor’s degrees completed as a proportion of all bachelor’s degrees. Findings are robust to alternative specifications, suggesting that institutions are responding to the performance funding STEM incentive by graduating more students in these high-demand fields.

show abstract

“…State higher education institutions have had to increase their efforts in raising private funding from alumni to help offset the declining revenue from the state and national governments (Knapp, 2000;Caboni & Proper, 2007;Li & Zumeta, 2015;Zhang, Ning, & Barnes, 2016). Fundraising programs of higher education institutions have been exploring methods to engage better with their various generations of constituent alumni and friends to generate the increase in private support .…”

Section: Section One Introduction To the Background Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Essence of social exchange through alumni engagement of millennials and their alma mater

Machovsky¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the donor and alumni engagement and perceptions of the â€œMillennialâ€ generation and descriptive statistics of the population (born between 1980-2004) at a rural Midwest University. Data were obtained from a University database containing demographic (i.e., gender, race, birth year, donor status, donation amount, activities involved in while in school), on Millennial alumni at the University. Data were analyzed by a variety of techniques that included descriptive statistics, Independent t-Test, deployment of a survey, and focus group. The quantitative findings concluded that Millennials who were born from 1980 to 1989 contributed larger average gifts then Millennials who were born from 1990 to 2004. Additionally, the research discovered that Millennials who were involved in organizations gave larger donations than those who were not in student organizations. The qualitative findings concluded that the Millennial population provided evidence of areas and reason on why they support the institution when connected to making a donation and the various aspects that affect one's ability due to communication preferences, affinity, areas to support, and financial ability. An understanding for professionals and researchers to be educated on how to better fundraise/engage with the Millennial generations within higher education will allow for universities and colleges to rely on this generation in the years to come.

show abstract

State Support for Higher Education

Cited by 10 publications

References 38 publications

Introduction to the Handbook of Public Funding of Research: understanding vertical and horizontal complexities

Introduction to the Handbook of Public Funding of Research: understanding vertical and horizontal complexities

Performance Funding Policy Impacts on STEM Degree Attainment

Essence of social exchange through alumni engagement of millennials and their alma mater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About