Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions

Living Edition
| Editors: Pedro Nuno Teixeira (Editor-in-Chief), Jung-Cheol Shin (Editor-in-Chief)

Accountability in Higher Education

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_156-1


The concept of accountability has always been figured in higher education if only for the fact that – despite notions of the ivory tower, knowledge for its own sake, and academic freedom (all suggesting academia does not need to account for its activities) – academics and their institutions through time have had relationships with various stakeholders in which “answerability” continuously played a role. Such answerability relates to universities accounting for – in the traditional sense of the word – public money spent but also to academics explaining, in their professional work, how they set up their research, which methods they used and why, and explaining to what extent their results are valid, reliable, and generalizable. What is relatively new is that the notion of accountability is much more explicit on stakeholders’ agendas than in the past and that it appears that the balance between accountability and autonomy tilts quite often toward an overemphasis on accounting...


Performance-based Funding Largest Higher Education System External Quality Assurance Indirect Sanctions Estermann 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Alexander, F. King. 2000. The changing face of accountability. Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. Journal of Higher Education 71 (4): 411–431.Google Scholar
  2. Behn, Richard D. 2003. Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review 63 (5): 586–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boer, De, Ben Jongbloed Harry, Paul Benneworth, Leon Cremonini, Renze Kolster, Andrea Kottmann, Katharina Lemmens-Krug, and Hans Vossensteyn. 2015. Performance-based funding and performance agreements in fourteen higher education systems. Enschede: CHEPS, University of Twente.Google Scholar
  4. Bovens, Mark. 2007. Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal 13 (4): 447–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burke, Joseph C., ed. 2004. Achieving accountability in higher education. Balancing public, academic and market demands. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Estermann, Thomas, Terhi Nokkala, and Monica Steinel. 2011. University autonomy in Europe II. The scorecard. Brussels: EUA.Google Scholar
  7. Hoecht, Andrea. 2006. Quality assurance in UK higher education: Issues of trust, control, professional autonomy and accountability. Higher Education 51: 541–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. King, Roger. 2015. Institutional autonomy and accountability. In The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance, ed. Jeroen Huisman, Harry de Boer, David D. Dill, and Manuel Souto-Otero, 485–505. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Murphy, Mark. 2009. Bureaucracy and its limits: Accountability and rationality in higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education 30 (6): 683–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Neave, Guy, and Frans A. van Vught, eds. 1991. Prometheus bound. The changing relationship between government and higher education in Western Europe. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  11. Power, Michael. 1997. The audit society. Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Rezende, Marcelo. 2010. The effects of accountability on higher education. Economics of Education Review 29: 842–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Romzek, Barbara S. 2000. Dynamics of public sector accountability in an era of reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences 66 (1): 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shin, Jung Cheol. 2010. Impacts of performance-based accountability on institutional performance in the U.S. Higher Education 60: 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Strathern, Marilyn. 1997. ‘Improving ratings’: Audit in the British university system. European Review 5: 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Trow, Martin. 1996. Trust, markets and accountability in higher education: A comparative perspective. Higher Education Policy 9 (4): 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Volkwein, J. Fredericks, and David A. Tandberg. 2008. Measuring up: Examining the connections among state structural characteristics, regulatory practices, and performance. Research in Higher Education 49: 180–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Williams, James, and Lee Harvey. 2015. Quality assurance in higher education. In The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance, ed. Jeroen Huisman, Harry de Boer, David D. Dill, and Manuel Souto-Otero, 506–525. Basinstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Centre for Higher Education Governance GhentGhent UniversityGhentBelgium

Section editors and affiliations

  • Alberto Amaral
    • 1
  • António Magalhães
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.CIPESUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Faculty of Psychology and Education SciencesUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  3. 3.Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies (CIPES)PortoPortugal