Appropriate governance is seen as a precondition for achieving the goals of maintaining or creating effective, competitive and attractive higher education systems (De Boer et al., 2012; van Vught, 1989a). In response to the challenges stemming from developments such as the emergence of mass higher education, globalization, privatization and fiscal crises, and inspired by neoliberal ideologies (such as New Public Management), contemporary governments continuously are in pursuit of approaches to governance that ‘fit’ (see also Clark, 1983b). The topic of governance finds itself in the centre of higher education politics and policies.


High Education High Education Institution Policy Instrument High Education System Rational Planning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ashby, W. R. (1956) An Introduction to Cybernetics (London: Chapman and Hall).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bardach, E. (1979) The Implementation Game (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).Google Scholar
  3. Beer, S. (1975) Platform for Change (New York: John Wiley).Google Scholar
  4. Bell, S. and A. Hindmoor (2009) Rethinking Governance. The Centrality of the State in Modern Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bemelmans-Videc, M. L., Rist, R.C. and E. Vedung (eds) (1998) Carrots, Sticks and Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers).Google Scholar
  6. Borrás, S. and Ch. Edquist (2013) ‘The choice of innovation policy instruments’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513–1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braybrooke, D. and Ch. E. Lindblom (1963) A Strategy of Decision, Policy Evaluation as a Social Process (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
  8. Burquel, N. and F. A. van Vught (2010) ‘Benchmarking in European higher education: a step beyond current quality models’, Tertiary Education and Management, 16(3), 243–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Capano, G. (2011) ‘Government continues to do its job: a comparative study of governance shifts in the higher education sector’, Public Administration, 89(4), 1622–1642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark, B. R. (1983a) The Higher Education System (Berkeley: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  11. Clark, B. R. (1983b) ‘Governing the higher education system’, in M. Shattock (ed) The Structure and Governance of Higher Education (Guildford: Society for Research into Higher Education).Google Scholar
  12. Craft, J. M. (2011) ‘Exploring the use of nodality based information policy tolls by Canadian electoral agencies’, Revue Gouvernance, winter, 1–18.Google Scholar
  13. Dahl, R. A. and Ch. E. Lindblom (1976) Politics, Economics and Welfare (orig. 1953) (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  14. Darby, M. R. and E. Karni (1973) ‘Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud’, Journal of Law and Economics, 16, 67–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Boer, H. and B. Jongbloed (2012) ‘A cross-national comparison of higher education markets in Western Europe’, in A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu and L. Wilson (eds) European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms (pp. 553–572) (Dordrecht: Springer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Boer, H. F., Enders, J. and U. Schimank (2008) ‘Comparing higher education governance systems in four European countries’, in N. C. Soguel and P. Jaccard (eds) Governance and Performance of Education Systems (pp. 35–54) (Dordrecht: Springer).Google Scholar
  17. De Boer, H., Enders, J., File, J. and B. Jongbloed (2010) Governance Reform. Progress in Higher Education Reform across Europe. Volume 1: Executive Summary Main Report (Brussels: European Commission).Google Scholar
  18. De Boer, H., Jongbloed, B., Benneworth, P., Westerheijden, D. and J. File (2012) Engaging in the Modernisation Agenda for European Higher Education (Brussels: ESMU).Google Scholar
  19. De Boer, H. F., Enders, J. and L. Leisyte (2007) ‘Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: the organizational transformation of the university’, Public Administration, 85 (1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dill, D. D. (1992) ‘Quality by design: toward a framework for academic quality management’, in J. Smart (ed) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. VIII (New York: Agathon Press).Google Scholar
  21. Dill, D. D. (1997) ‘Higher education markets and public policy’, Higher Education Policy, 10(3–4), 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dill, D. D. and M. Beerkens (2013) ‘Designing the framework conditions for assuring academic standards: lessons learned about professional, market, and government regulation of academic quality’, Higher Education, 65(3), 341–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dror, Y. (1968) Public Policymaking Re-Examined (San Francisco: Chandler).Google Scholar
  24. Elmore, R. F. (1987) ‘Instruments and strategy in public policy’, Policy Studies Review, 7(1), 174–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Emons, W. (1997) ‘Credence goods and fraudulent experts’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 28(1), 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Enders, J. (2002) Governing the Academic Commons: About Blurring Boundaries, Blistering Organisations, and Growing Demands (Inaugural lecture), in CHEPS Inaugurals 2002, (pp. 69–105) (Enschede: University of Twente).Google Scholar
  27. Etzioni, A. (1968) The Active Society (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
  28. Franck, E. P. and B. Schönfelder (2000) ‘On the role of competition in higher education uses and abuses of the economic metaphor’, Schmalenbach Business Review, 52, 214–237.Google Scholar
  29. Friedmann, J. (1973) Retracking America, A Theory of Transactive Planning (New York: Garden City).Google Scholar
  30. Gallagher, M. (2001) ‘Modern university governance: a national perspective’, in The Australia Institute The idea of a university, 49, conference proceedings.Google Scholar
  31. Glenny, L. A. (ed) (1979) Funding Higher Education: A Six-Nation Analysis (New York: Praeger).Google Scholar
  32. Gornitzka, Å. (1999) ‘Governmental policies and organisational change in higher education’, Higher Education, 38(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hood, Ch. C. and H. Z. Margetts (2007) The Tools of Government in the Digital Age (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
  34. Hood, Ch. (2007) ‘Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: reflections on the tools of government after two decades’, Governance, 20(1), 127–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hood, Ch. C. (1983) The Tools of Government (London: MacMillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Howden, C. and A. D. Pressey (2008) ‘Customer value creation in professional service relationships: the case of credence goods’, The Service Industries Journal, 28(6), 789–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Howlett, M. (2009) ‘Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multilevel nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design’, Policy Science, 42, 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Huang, P., Lurie, N. H. and S. Mitra (2009) ‘Searching for experience on the web: an empirical examination of consumer behaviour for search and experience goods’, Journal for Marketing, 73, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Huisman, J. and A. Pausits (eds) (2010) Higher Education Management and Development. Compendium for Managers (Munster: Waxmann Verlag).Google Scholar
  40. Hyde, A., Clarke, M. and J. Drennan (2013) ‘The changing role of academics and the rise of managerialism’, in B. M. Kehm and U. Teichler (eds) The Academic Profession in Europe: New Tasks and New Challenges (The Changing Academy — The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective 5) (Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media).Google Scholar
  41. Jantsch, E. (1972) Technological Planning and Social Futures (London: Cassel/Associated Business Programmes).Google Scholar
  42. Kehm, B. M. and U. Lanzendorf (eds) (2006) Reforming University Governance. Changing Conditions for Research in Four European Countries (Bonn: Lemmens).Google Scholar
  43. Kerr, C. (1982) The Uses of the University, 3rd edn (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  44. Lane, J. E. (2000) New Public Management (London/New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  45. Lapworth, S. (2004) ‘Arresting decline in shared governance: towards a flexible model for academic participation’, Higher Education Quarterly, 58(4), 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lascoumes, P. and P. Le Galès (2007) ‘Introduction: understanding public policy through its instruments — from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation’, Governance, 20(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Li, Q. and C. Gerstl-Pepin (eds) (2014) Survival of the Fittest. The Shifting Contours of Higher Education in China and the United States (Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht/London: Springer).Google Scholar
  48. Lindblom, Ch. (1977) Politics and Markets (New York: Basic Books).Google Scholar
  49. Lindblom, Ch. E. (1959) ‘The Science of muddling through’, Public Administration Review, 19 (2), 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lindblom, Ch. E. (1965) Intelligence of Democracy (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
  51. Linder, S. H. and B. G. Peters (1998) ‘The study of policy instruments: four schools of thought’, in B. G. Peters and F. K. M. Nispen (eds) Public Policy Instruments. Evaluating the Tools of Public Administration (pp. 33–45) (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
  52. Maassen, P. and F. van Vught (1994) ‘Alternative models of governmental steering in higher education: an analysis of steering models and policy-instruments in five countries’, Comparative Policy Studies in Higher Education, 35–65.Google Scholar
  53. Mayntz, R. (2004) ‘Governance im modernen Staat’, in A. Benz (ed) Governance — Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen. Eine Einführung (pp. 65–76) (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mcdonnell, L. (1988) Policy Design as Instrument Design, paper presented at the 1988 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. Washington DC.Google Scholar
  55. Middlehurst, R. and P. N. Teixeira (2012) ‘Governance within the EHEA: dynamic trends, common challenges, and national particularities’, in A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu and L. Wilson (eds) European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms (pp. 527–552) (Dordrecht: Springer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. L. Wilson (eds) European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms (pp. 527–552) (Dordrecht: Springer).Google Scholar
  57. Mitnick, B. M. (1980) The Political Economy of Regulation; Creating, Designing and Removing Regulatory Reforms (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
  58. Neave, G. (1988) ‘On the cultivation of quality, efficiency and enterprise: an overview of recent trends in higher education in Western Europe, 1986–1988’, European Journal of Education, 7–23.Google Scholar
  59. Neave, G. and F. A. van Vught (eds) (1991) Prometheus Bound, the Changing Relationship Between Government and Higher Education in Western Europe (London: Pergamon).Google Scholar
  60. Nelson, P. (1970) ‘Information and consumer behaviour’, Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nelson, P. (1974) ‘Advertising as information’, Journal of Political Economy, 82(4), 729–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pechar, H. (2012) ‘The decline of an academic oligarchy. The Bologna process and “Humboldt’s last warriors” ’, in A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu and L. Wilson (eds) European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms (pp. 613–629) (Dordrecht: Springer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Persson, A. (2006) ‘Characterizing the policy instrument mixes for municipal waste in Sweden and England’, European Environment, 16, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Peters, B. G. (1996) The Future of Governing: Four Emerging Models (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas).Google Scholar
  65. Pierre, J. and B. G. Peters (2000) Governance, Politics and the State (Houndmills Basingstoke: Macmillan Press).Google Scholar
  66. Polanyi, M. (1962) ‘The Republic of Science: its political and economic theory’, Minerva, 1(summer/autumn), 54–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Powell, W. W. (1990) ‘Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization’, Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336.Google Scholar
  68. Reale, E. and M. Seeber (2013) ‘Instruments as empirical evidence for the analysis of higher education policies’, Higher Education, 65(1), 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rhoades, G. and S. Slaughter (1997) ‘Academic capitalism, managed professionals, and supply-side higher education’, Social Text, 9–38.Google Scholar
  70. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997) Understanding Governance. Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability (Buckingham: Open University Press).Google Scholar
  71. Salamon, L. M. (2000) ‘The new governance and the tools of public action: an introduction’, Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(5), 1611–1674.Google Scholar
  72. Salmi, J. and A. Saroyan (2007) ‘League tables as policy instruments: uses and misuses’, Higher Education Management and Policy, 19(2), 31–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schneider, A. and H. Ingram (1990) ‘Behavioral assumptions of policy tools’, Journal of Politics, 52 (2), 510–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schneider, A. L. and H. M. Ingram (1997) Policy Design for Democracy (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas).Google Scholar
  75. Schram, F. (2005) Het sturen van de samenleving. Mogelijkheden van een beleidsinstrumenten-benadering (Spoor veranderingsmanagement. B. O. Vlaanderen) (Leuven: Bestuurlijke Organisatie Vlaanderen, 210).Google Scholar
  76. Simon, H. A. (1957) Administrative Behavior, 2nd edn (New York: Macmillan).Google Scholar
  77. Sørensen, E. (2002) ‘Democratic theory and network governance’, Administrative Theory & Praxis, 24(4), 693–720.Google Scholar
  78. Sowell, Th. (1980) Knowledge and Decisions (New York: Basic Books).Google Scholar
  79. Van der Doelen, F. C. J. and P. J. Klok (1989) ‘Beleidsinstrumenten’, in A. Hoogerwerf (ed) Overheidsbeleid (pp. 73–91) (Alphen aan den Rijn).Google Scholar
  80. Van Gunsteren, H. R. (1976) The Quest for Control, A Critique of the Rational-Central Rule Approach in Public Affairs (New York: Wiley).Google Scholar
  81. van Vught, F. A. (1988) ‘A new autonomy in European higher education? an exploration and analysis of the strategy of self-regulation in higher education governance’, International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, 12(1), 16–27.Google Scholar
  82. van Vught, F. A. (ed) (1989a) Governmental Strategies and Innovation in Higher Education (Higher education policy series) (London: Jessica Kingsley).Google Scholar
  83. van Vught, F. A. (1989b) ‘Creating innovations in higher education’, European Journal of Education, 24(3), 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. van Vught, F. A. (1992) Autonomy and Accountability in Government-University Relationships, paper presented at the World Bank Worldwide Senior Policy Seminar on Improvement and Innovation of Higher Education in Developing Countries. Kuala Lumpur, June 30– July 4.Google Scholar
  85. van Vught, F. A. (1995) Policy models and policy instruments in higher education. The effects of governmental policy-making on the innovative behaviour of higher education institutions. Vienna, IHS Political Science Series26, October 1995.Google Scholar
  86. van Vught, F. A. (ed) (2009) Mapping the Higher Education Landscape (Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media BV).Google Scholar
  87. van Vught, F. A. and D. F. Westerheijden (2012) ‘Transparency, quality and accountability’, in F. A. van Vught and F. Ziegele (eds) Multidimensional Ranking: The Design and Development of U-Multirank (Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media BV).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. van Vught, F. A. and F. Ziegele (eds) (2012) Multidimensional Ranking: The Design and Development of U-Multirank (Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media BV).Google Scholar
  89. van Vught, F. and J. Huisman (2013) ‘Institutional profiles: some strategic tools’, Tuning Journal for Higher Education, 1, 21–36.Google Scholar
  90. Vedung, E. (1998) ‘Policy instruments: typologies and theories’, in M. Bemelmans-Videc, R. C. Rist and E. Vedung (eds) Carrots, Sticks, and Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation (pp. 21–58) (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers).Google Scholar
  91. Vedung, E. and F. van der Doelen (1998) ‘The sermon: information programs in the public policy process — choice, effects, and evaluation’, in M. Bemelmans-Videc, R. C. Rist and E. Vedung (eds) Carrots, Sticks & Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation (pp. 103–128) (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers).Google Scholar
  92. Weick, K. F. (1976) ‘Educational organizations as loosely Coupled systems’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Frans van Vught and Harry de Boer 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frans van Vught
  • Harry de Boer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations