Governmental Structure, Trustee Selection, and Public University Prices and Spending: Multiple Means to Similar Ends

Abstract

Scholars have devoted much attention in recent years to the possible effects of institutions on policy implementation, but empirical tests are limited to relatively simple contexts. I estimate the effects of multiple instruments for exercising political control over public university prices and, hence, spending. I find that public universities in states with statewide coordinating boards or few governing boards, and universities governed by trustees selected by elected state officials or the general public charge significantly lower prices than universities in states with decentralized structures, or governed by trustees chosen by academic stakeholders. The difference in revenues is reflected in spending on activities that directly benefit administrators and faculty, but that may also benefit students. Different hypothetical combinations of institutions yield similar results, which suggests that the particular system adopted by each state depends on the politics of institutional change as well as the intended outcomes.

Resident and Nonresident Tuition and Enrollment at Flagship State Universities

“…Public universities in states in which the unemployment rate (UNEMP) is high, and hence the opportunity cost of enrolling in school is low, charge higher in-state tuition. Unlike Lowry (2001b), we find no evidence that public universities in states with more autonomous governance structures (GOV) charge higher tuition.…”

Public Higher Education Governing Boards Composition and Regional Difference in U.S.

“…Four states (Colorado, Michigan, Nebraska and Nevada) in West and Middle West have general public elections, while only one in other regions. Lowry (2001) showed that tuition pricing in states with "centralized" higher education governance is lower than "decentralized" states because "centralized" governance have more influence over university due to the political control of board membership. On the other hand, the higher education system in these states is more relying on the state economic and societal situations.…”

“…Knott & Payne (2001) found that universities with a statewide board and with members that are not primarily appointed by the governor had higher productivity and resources. Lowry (2001) demonstrated that public universities in states with statewide coordinating boards or few governing boards, and universities governed by trustees selected by state officials charge much lower tuitions than universities in states of decentralized structures, or governed by trustees chosen by the academic constituents. Calhoun & Kamerschen (2010) took a further step of tuition analysis.…”

Actividad investigadora y contexto económico. El caso de las universidades públicas españolas

“…Así, un territorio más dinámico económica-mente o con un sistema de I+D+i más desarrollado puede aportar más recursos, plantear retos e iniciativas que contribuyan a generar contratos con los grupos de investigación de las universidades, o a generar patentes o bien proyectos de investigación que concurran a convocatorias nacionales o internacionales con más garantías de éxito, incluso esa conexión con el entorno puede favorecer la elaboración de tesis doctorales. Y no solamente habría que tener en cuenta aspectos económicos sino de funcionamiento, el grado de control político por parte de la administración pública y la elección de los gestores en un territorio determinado tiene influencia sobre las tasas, los precios públicos y los recursos de las universidades (Lowry, (2001).…”