Skip to main content

Steering Change – Negotiations of Autonomy and Accountability in the Self-Owning University

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Enacting the University: Danish University Reform in an Ethnographic Perspective

Abstract

This chapter concerns changes to the government’s mechanisms for steering universities. Government and critics alike heralded the 2003 Danish university law as a radical rupture in the history of Danish universities but this chapter questions that view by identifying continuities in government’s steering mechanisms. By employing the concept of articulation, it elucidates the rearrangement of these mechanisms when universities became self-owning institutions. The concept of self-ownership dates back to the abolition of serfdom in Denmark but in recent years it has been developed as an institutional format for the ‘modernisation’ of the Danish education sector through the creation of self-owning institutions steered at a distance from the state. The chapter follows the concept as it came to articulate universities as ‘free’ and self-owning although without actual ownership of any assets. It further explores how the self-owning status of universities became a platform for the negotiation of a largescale amalgamation of institutions in the Danish university and government research sectors; the vehicle for the introduction of company accounting into universities; and finally the basis for new and tighter steering of universities through a new regime of contracts and audit. Based on this, the chapter turns to examining the policy activism of university leaders and ministry officials within this emerging policy assemblage. It suggests that the self-ownership reform did not distance the universities from government decision making, but instead intensified the university leadership-government relationship. The transformation of Danish universities is in this sense was contingent upon positioned and partial interventions of university leaders in new relations with government policy makers. Leaders have, we argue, deployed the institutional capabilities of universities and articulated the elements of the wider university steering assemblage in varied ways that continuously transform and recreate the university, while always solidifying the focal tension between government steering and university self-assertiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The abolition of serfdom is itself a contested event in Danish history. Of particular relevance to our discussion, it is unclear to what extent the reform was directed by the king and some of the nobility, and to what extent is was a bottom-up peasant movement to break free.

  2. 2.

    Establishing and running these self-owning schools and associated co-operative dairies and slaughter houses not only politicised and empowered the peasantry, but made agriculture into a highly profitable basis for the Danish economy. There are echoes of this in the government’s looking to self-owning universities to provide a basis for Denmark’s success in the global knowledge economy.

  3. 3.

    Already in 1980 the funding had been tied to teaching performance, but from 1994 a real-time relationship between the passing of exams and the education funding was established and thereby a tighter link between performance and liquidity.

  4. 4.

    It is telling of the different ways of managing universities as institutions and as education providers that parallel contracts with the Ministry of Education took the form of result contracts with quantitative targets.

References

  • Aagaard, K. (2012). Kampen om basismidlerne. Historiskinstitutionel analyse af basisbevillingsmodellens udvikling på universitetsområdet i Danmark (Ph.D. thesis). Aarhus: Aarhus University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auditor General (Rigsrevisionen). (2003). Beretning til statsrevisorerne om selvejende uddannelsesinstitutioner Maj 2003 RB B101/03. Copenhagen: Rigsrevisionen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auditor General (Rigsrevisionen). (2013). Beretning til statsrevisorerne om universiteternes stigende egenkapital. Copenhagen: Rigsrevisionen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, S., & Ong, A. (2004). Global assemblages, anthropological problems. In A. Ong & S. Collier (Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems (pp. 3–21). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copenhagen University. (2002a). Københavns Universitets Årbog 2002. Copenhagen: Københavns Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copenhagen University. (2002b). Høringssvar til MVTU om udkast til forslag til ny Universitetslov. [Remarks for the Ministry of Science on the draft of a new university law]. Copenhagen: Københavns Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copenhagen University. (2007). SAGSNOTAT Vedr.: Rigsrevisionens protokol for KU, KVL og DFU vedr. årsrapport 2006 mv. sagsbehandler: Thomas Buchvald Vind/John Martinsen 11 april 2007. Copenhagen: Københavns Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (1992). Lov om universiteter m.fl. (universitetsloven). Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (1999). Bekendtgørelse af lov om universiteter m.fl. (universitetsloven). Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (2000a). Lov om Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitet. Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (2000b). Lov om Danmarks Tekniske Universitets overgang til selveje. Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (2002). Forslag til Lov om universiteter (universitetloven). Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Parliament (Folketinget). (2007). Forslag til lov om ændring af universitetsloven. (Varetagelse af opgaver for en minister, ankenævn for meritafgørelser, ph.d.-skoler m.v.). Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish Research Commission. (2001). Report from the Danish Research Commission. Copenhagen: Videnskabsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish University and Property Agency. (2007). Udvikling af universiteter – et moderne tilsyn. Udkast. Copenhagen: Universitets- og Bygningsstyrelsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danish University and Property Agency. (2009). Danish university evaluation 2009 – Evaluation report. In The Danish university and property agency under the auspices of the Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Copenhagen: Universitets- og Bygningsstyrelsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Featherstone, D. (2011). On assemblage and articulation. Area, 43(2), 139–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • FORSKERforum. (2002). Selveje er ikke selveje. 156/June: 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Globalisation Council. (2006). Progress, innovation, cohesion. Strategy for Denmark in the global economy – Summary. Government of Denmark. http://www.stm.dk/multimedia/PROGRESS_INNOVATION_AND_COHESION.pdf. Accessed 24 Jan 2015.

  • Government of Denmark (Regeringen). (2005). Nye mål. Regeringsgrundlag VK Regeringen II. Copenhagen: Regeringen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Denmark (Regeringen). (2006). Fremgang, fornyelse og tryghed strategi for Danmark i den globale økonomi. Copenhagen: Regeringen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossberg, L. (1996). On postmodernism and articulation: An interview with Stuart Hall. In D. Morley & C. Kuan-Hsing (Eds.), Stuart Hall. Critical dialogues in cultural studies (pp. 131–150). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haarder, B. (1991). Redegørelse af 23/10 91 om åbent marked for videregående Uddannelser. Folk, 1991–1992, 782–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haarder, B., Nilsson, E., & Severinsen, H. (1982). Ny-liberalismen – og dens rødder. Copenhagen: Liberal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science of question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1988). Rammestyring og selvforvaltning – økonomistyring af uddannelsesinstitutioner. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1990). U91. Det nye mønster i dansk uddannelses- og forskningspolitik. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1994). Universiteter i vækst. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1997). Selvejende undervisnings institutioner. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1998a). Rapport om taxameterstyring. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (1998b). Det 21. århundredes uddannelsesinstitutioner – Debatoplæg om de videregående uddannelsers institutionelle struktur. Copenhagen: Undervisningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (Undervisningsministeriet). (2001). Taxametersystemet for de videregående uddannelse. Rapport fra undervisningsministerens idé og perspektivgruppe. Undervisningsministeriet: Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Finance (Finansministeriet). (1996). Budgetredegørelse 96. Tillæg: Styringsformer i den offentlige sektor. Copenhagen: Finansministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Finance (Finansministeriet). (2000). Aktstykke 331. Copenhagen: Finansministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Finance (Finansministeriet). (2003). Omkostninger og effektivitet i staten. Copenhagen: Finansministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Research (Forskningsministeriet). (1998). Universitets- og forsknings politisk redegørelse 1998. Nye fleksible styreformer. Copenhagen: Forskningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Research (Forskningsministeriet). (1999). Udviklingskontrakter. Stærkere selvstyre, stærkere universiteter. Copenhagen: Forskningsministeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neave, G., & van Vught, F. (1991). Prometheus bound: The changing relationship between government and higher education in Western Europe. Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2005). Reviews of national policies for education. University education in Denmark. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong, A. (2008). Scales of exception: Experiments with knowledge and sheer life in tropical Southeast Asia. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 29(2), 117–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, D., & Graebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, O. K. (2011). Konkurrencestaten. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., Bathgate, K., Caulfield, J., Smullen, A., & Talbot, C. (2001). Agency fever? Analysis of an international policy fashion. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 3(3), 271–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2009). Vurdering af universiteternes egenkapital og likviditet. Copenhagen: Universitets- og Bygningsstyrelsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Public Accounts Committee (Statsrevisorerne). (2002). Beretning om selvejende uddannelsesinstitutioner. Beretning no. 11. Copenhagen: Folketinget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, N., O’Malley, P., & Valverde, M. (2006). Governmentality. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2, 83–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights. From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shore, C., & Wright, S. (1997). Policy: A new field of anthropology. In C. Shore & S. Wright (Eds.), Anthropology of policy: Critical perspectives on governance and power (pp. 3–42). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sivertsen, G., & Schneider, J. (2012). Evaluering af den bibliometriske forskningsindikator. NIFUStep report 17/2012. Oslo: NIFUStep.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. (1991). Partial connections. Walnut Creek: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. (2011). ‘Bliver universiteter til virksomheder’ [Are universities becoming businesses?]. Dansk Pædagogisk Tidsskrift, 3, 71–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. (2012). Danske universiteter – virksomheder i statens koncern? In J. Faye & D. B. Pedersen (Eds.), Hvordan styres videnssamfundet? (pp. 263–284). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. (2014). Knowledge that counts: Points systems and the governance of Danish universities. In D. Smith & A. Griffith (Eds.), Under new public management: Institutional ethnographies of changing front-line work (pp. 294–337). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S., & Boden, R. (2011). Markets, managerialism and measurement: Organisational transformation of universities in UK and Denmark. In J. E. Kristensen, M. Raffnsøe-Møller, & H. Nørreklit (Eds.), University in measures (pp. 79–99). Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S., & Ørberg, J. W. (2008). Autonomy and control: Danish university reform in the context of modern governance. Learning and Teaching: International Journal of Higher Education in the Social Sciences, 1(1), 27–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S., & Ørberg, J. W. (2017). Universities in the competition state: Lessons from Denmark. In S. Wright & C. Shore (Eds.), Death of the public university? (pp. 69–89). New York: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Øbing, L. (2004). KU2005 og medarbejderne. Københavns Universitet: Økonomireformprojekt KU2005. Copenhagen: Københavns Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Øllgaard, J. (2002a). DTU’s selveje fik 160 millioner ekstra. FORSKERforum, 156, 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Øllgaard, J. (2002b). Mens vi venter på Sander. FORSKERforum, 156, 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Øllgaard, J. (2003). Et træt dødsleje. FORSKERforum, 164, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Øllgaard, J. (2007). Giv universiteterne fri…. FORSKERforum, 202, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ørberg, J. W. (2006a). Trust in universities – Parliamentary debates on the 2003 university law (Working Papers on University Reform no 2). Copenhagen: Danish School of Education (DPU), Aarhus University. http://edu.au.dk/fileadmin/www.dpu.dk/forskning/forskningsprogrammer/epoke/workingpapers/WP2_-_trust_in_universities.pdf. Accessed 09 Sept 2016.

  • Ørberg, J. W. (2006b). Setting universities free? The background to the self-ownership of Danish universities (Working Papers on University Reform no 1). Copenhagen: Danish School of Education (DPU), Aarhus University. http://edu.au.dk/fileadmin/www.dpu.dk/forskning/forskningsprogrammer/epoke/workingpapers/Working_Paper_1__Setting_Universities_Free__PDF.pdf0.pdf. Accessed 09 Sept 2016.

  • Ørberg, J. W. (2007). Who speaks for the university? – Legislative frameworks for Danish university leadership 1970–2003 (Working Papers on University Reform no 5). Copenhagen: Danish School of Education (DPU), Aarhus University. http://edu.au.dk/fileadmin/www.dpu.dk/forskning/forskningsprogrammer/epoke/workingpapers/om-dpu_institutter_paedagogisk-antropologi_new-managementx2c-new-identities_working-papers_20070611113532_working-paper-5%2D%2Dwho-speaks-for-the-university2.pdf. Accessed 09 Sept 2016.

  • Ørberg, J. W., & Wright, S. (2009). Paradoxes of the self: Self-owning universities in a society of control. In E. Sørensen & P. Triantafillou (Eds.), The politics of self-governance (pp. 117–136). Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jakob Williams Ørberg .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature B.V.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ørberg, J.W., Wright, S. (2019). Steering Change – Negotiations of Autonomy and Accountability in the Self-Owning University. In: Enacting the University: Danish University Reform in an Ethnographic Perspective. Higher Education Dynamics, vol 53. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1921-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1921-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1919-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1921-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics