Rise of Global Rankings and the Competitive Logic

  • Tero Erkkilä
  • Ossi Piironen
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Global Higher Education book series (PSGHE)

Abstract

The development of the numbers-based knowledge governance framework is a relatively recent undertaking, but much has happened over the last 20 years. This chapter explores the rankings landscape as it was at the beginning of the 2000s, focusing on the most prominent “first generation” of measures of good governance, competition, and academic performance, characterized by aggregation of data and attempt for maximal geographical scope. It shows how measurement has actually functioned to depoliticize the notion of good governance and how rankings have reinforced atomistic subjectification processes that project higher education institutions as self-governing entities solely responsible for their own success. We see ideational and operational interlinkages between the measurements that we think have come to define global knowledge governance.

References

  1. Ahola, S., and J. Mesikämmen. 2003. Finnish Higher Education Policy and the Ongoing Bologna Process. Higher Education in Europe 28 (2): 2017–2227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacchi, C.L. 1999. Women, Policy and Politics: The Construction of Policy Problems. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Blomqvist, Carita. 2007. Avoin koordinaatiomenetelmä Euroopan unionin koulutuspolitiikassa. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Management Studies, University of Tampere.Google Scholar
  4. Boer, Harry de, J. Enders, and U. Schimank. 2007. On the Way towards New Public Management? The Governance of University Systems in England, the Netherlands, Austria, and Germany. In New Forms of Governance in Research Organizations. Disciplinary Approaches, Interfaces and Integration, ed. D. Jansen. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Bollen, K.A. 1980. Issues in the Comparative Measurement of Political Democracy. American Sociological Review 43 (3): 370–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corbett, A. 2012. Principles, Problems, Politics … What Does the Historical Record of EU Cooperation in Higher Education Tell the EHEA Generation? In European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms, ed. A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu, and L. Wilson, 59–81. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media.Google Scholar
  7. Cutright, P. 1963. National Political Development: Measurement and Analysis. American Sociological Review 28 (2): 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Erkkilä, Tero, and Ossi Piironen. 2009. Politics and Numbers. The Iron Cage of Governance Indices. In Ethics and Integrity of Public Administration: Concepts and Cases, ed. Raymond W. Cox III, 125–145. Armonk: ME Sharpe.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2014a. Shifting Fundaments of European Higher Education Governance: Competition, Ranking, Autonomy and Accountability. Comparative Education 50 (2): 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. ———. 2014b. (De)politicizing Good Governance: The World Bank Institute, the OECD and the Politics of Governance Indicators. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 27 (4): 344–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2013.850020.Google Scholar
  11. European Commission. 2003. The Role of the Universities in the Europe of Knowledge. COM(2003) 58 final. Brussels: European Commission, 5 February.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2005a. Mobilising the Brainpower of Europe: Enabling Universities to Make Their Full Contribution to the Lisbon Strategy. COM(2005) 152 final. Brussels: European Commission, 20 April.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2005b. Annex to the Communication from the Commission. Mobilising the Brainpower of Europe: Enabling Universities to Make Their Full Contribution to the Lisbon Strategy. European Higher Education in a Worldwide Perspective. SEC(2005) 518. Brussels: European Commission, 20 April.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 2006. Delivering on the Modernisation Agenda for Universities: Education, Research and Innovation. COM(2006) 208 final. Brussels: European Commission, 10 May.Google Scholar
  15. ———. 2007. From Bergen to London. The Contribution of the European Commission to the Bologna Process.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2008. Commission Staff Working Document. Accompanying Document to the Report from the Commission to the Council on the Council Resolution of 23 November 2007 on Modernising Universities for Europe’s Competitiveness in a Global Knowledge economy. SEC(2008) 2719. Brussels: European Commission, 30 October.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 2009. Commission Staff Working Document. Progress Towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training: Indicators and Benchmarks 2009. SEC(2009) 1616. Brussels: European Commission, 23 November.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 2011. Supporting Growth and Jobs—An Agenda for the Modernisation of Europe’s Higher Education System. COM(2011) 567 final. Brussels: European Commission, 20 September.Google Scholar
  19. European University Association. 2001. Salamanca Convention 2001: The Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area. Geneva: European University Association.Google Scholar
  20. Fougner, Tore. 2008. Neoliberal Governance of States: The Role of Competitiveness Indexing and Country Benchmarking. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 37 (2): 303–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gasiorowski, M.J. 1990. The Political Regimes Project. Studies in Comparative International Development 25 (1): 109–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hadenius, A. 1992. Democracy and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hazelkorn, Ellen. 2007. The Impact of League Tables and Ranking Systems on Higher Education Decision Making. Higher Education Management and Policy. 19 (2): 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ———. 2009. Rankings and the Battle for World-Class Excellence: Institutional Strategies and Policy Choices. Higher Education Management and Policy 21 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. ———. 2011. Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education: The Battle for World-Class Excellence. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Huff, Richard F. 2011. Measuring Performance in US Municipalities: Do Personnel Policies Predict System Level Outcomes? Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 13 (1): 11–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huisman, J., and M. van der Wende. 2004. The EU and Bologna: Are Supra- and International Initiatives Threatening Domestic Agendas? European Journal of Education 39 (3): 349–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. IMD. 2014. World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne: IMD.Google Scholar
  29. International Association of Universities. 1998. Academic Freedom, University Autonomy and Social Responsibility. IAU Policy Statement. Google Scholar
  30. King, Roger. 2009. Governing Universities Globally: Organizations, Regulation and Rankings. Cheltenham: Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lipset, S.M. 1959. Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. The American Political Science Review 53 (1): 69–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liu, Nian Cai, and Ying Cheng. 2005. The Academic Ranking of World Universities. Higher Education in Europe 30 (2): 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720500260116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Locke, William, Line Verbik, John T. T. Richardson, and Roger King. 2008. Counting What Is Measured or Measuring What Counts? League Tables and Their Impact on Higher Education Institutions in England. Report to HEFCE. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England.Google Scholar
  34. Morphew, C.C., and C. Swanson. 2011. On the Efficacy of Raising Your University’s Rankings. In University Rankings: Theoretical Basis, Methodology and Impacts on Global Higher Education, ed. J.C. Shin, R.K. Toutkoushian, and U. Teichler, 185–199. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Munck, Gerardo L., and Jay Verkuilen. 2002. Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: Evaluating Alternative Indices. Comparative Political Studies 35 (1): 5–26.Google Scholar
  36. Neave, Guy. 2009. Institutional Autonomy 2010–2012: A Tale of Elan—Two Steps Back to Make One Very Large Leap Forward. In The European higher Education Area: Perspectives on a Moving Target, ed. Barbara M. Kehm, Jeroen Huisman, and Bjørn Stensaker. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Neubauer, D.E. 1967. Some Conditions of Democracy. The American Political Science Review 61 (4): 1002–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nokkala, Terhi. 2012. Institutional Autonomy and the Attractiveness of the European Higher Education Area—Facts or Tokenistic Discourse? In European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms, ed. A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu, and L. Wilson, 59–81. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. OECD. 2008. Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. http://www.oecd.org/std/42495745.pdf
  40. Paradeise, Catherine, Emanuela Reale, and Gaële Goastellec. 2009a. A Comparative Approach to Higher Education Reforms in Western European Countries. In University Governance: Western European Comparative Perspectives, ed. Catherine Paradeise, Emanuela Reale, Ivar Bleiklie, and Ferlie Ewan. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Paradeise, Catherine, Emanuela Reale, Gaële Goastellec, and Ivar Bleiklie. 2009b. Universities Steering Between Stories and History. In University Governance: Western European Comparative Perspectives, ed. Catherine Paradeise, Emanuela Reale, Ivar Bleiklie, and Ferlie Ewan. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Piironen, Ossi. 2013. The Transnational Idea of University Autonomy and the Reform of the Finnish Universities Act. Higher Education Policy 26 (1): 127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. ———. 2016. Transnational Governance by Numbers: Rankings as Mechanisms of Governing. Academic Dissertation, Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
  44. Rauhvargers, A. 2011. Global University Rankings and Their Impact: EUA Report on Rankings 2011. Brussels: European University Association.Google Scholar
  45. Robertson, S., and R. Keeling. 2008. Stirring the Lions: Strategy and Tactics in Global Higher Education. Globalisation, Societies and Education 6 (3): 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sartori, Giovanni. 1970/2009. Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics. In Concepts and Method in Social Science: The Tradition of Giovanni Sartori, ed. David Collier and John Gerring. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Skinner, Quentin. 1969. Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. History and Theory 8 (1): 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. UNESCO. 1997. Recommendation Concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel: Resolution Adopted on the Report of Commission II at the 26th Plenary Meeting, on 11 November 1997. UNESCO, Paris.Google Scholar
  49. World Economic Forum. 2008. The Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009. Geneva: World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  50. ———. 2012. The Global Competitiveness Report 2011–2012. Geneva: World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  51. ———. 2016. The Global Competitiveness Report 2016–2017. Geneva: World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  52. Zgaga, P. 2012. Reconsidering the EHEA Principles: Is There a ‘Bologna Phiulosophy’? In European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms, ed. A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu, and L. Wilson, 59–81. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tero Erkkilä
    • 1
  • Ossi Piironen
    • 2
  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Ministry for Foreign Affairs of FinlandHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations