How do Revenue Variations Affect Expenditures Within U.S. Research Universities?

Leslie, Larry L.; Slaughter, Sarah; Taylor, Barrett J.; Zhang, Liang

doi:10.1007/s11162-011-9248-x

Cited by 74 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• While both public and private universities were eligible to pursue ARRA funds, public universities often face a variety of state-level regulations from which privates are relatively free (St. John et al, 2012). Campus decision makers at private universities often employ this freedom to reallocate funds aggressively in the pursuit of future funding (Leslie et al, 2012). The interaction of institutional R&D expenditures with private control of the university tested the possibility that private universities used discretionary R&D support differently than did publics.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By funding 'indirect costs' associated with research, federal grants free up discretionary funds to be reallocated by campus administrators (Stephan, 2012). Barrett J. Taylor and Brendan Cantwell Research Universities and The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 202 As a result, university officials often reallocate revenues from other sources, such as tuition, in the hope of capturing additional federal support (Ehrenberg et al, 2007;Leslie et al, 2012). The result is that federal R&D support, including ARRA funding, is valuable not only for the maintenance and extension of research capacity, but also as an indirect source of basic support for campus operations.…”

Section: Arra and The Great Recessionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quasi-market competitions also can change the ways in which universities operate, as campus decision makers repurpose human and financial resources in an effort to secure additional support. Such restructuring, however, tends to serve the best-resourced universities, which possess more slack resources that can be diverted into new areas of activity (Ehrenberg et al, 2007;Leslie et al, 2012;Taylor, 2015, 2013b;Taylor and Cantwell, 2015) and whose investigators are likely to be influential in determining funding (Stephan, 2012). In these ways, quasi-markets and universities mutually shape and determine one another, with the likely consequence that competition for public funds will yield heightened stratification among universities.…”

Section: Arra Quasi-market Allocation and Stratificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research Universities and The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Competition, Resource Concentration, and the ‘Great Recession’ in the United States

Taylor

Cantwell

2015

High Educ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper conceptualizes the US federal government's response to the 'Great Recession' as a 'natural experiment' whose broad emphasis on counter-cyclical spending contrasts with the tendency towards stratification within the quasi-market for academic research support. Regression results indicate that resources tended to flow towards a few alreadyadvantaged universities, but also supported universities with lower levels of investment in research equipment and smaller bases of support from business and industry. Because the extent to which these results describe quasi-market mechanisms generally or merely reflect the peculiarities of the US system is unclear, the paper concludes with propositions that could be critiqued and refined through studies in other national contexts.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Arra and The Great Recessionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Arra Quasi-market Allocation and Stratificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research Universities and The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Competition, Resource Concentration, and the ‘Great Recession’ in the United States

Taylor

Cantwell

2015

High Educ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Main stakeholders of USA universities are, first of all, students who are paying fees and any other clients who are paying a service, from consultancy to location rentals, from research to asset management [5]. With the ongoing crisis, marketing officers of USA universities have implemented credit schemes.…”

Section: Economics Of Us Universities Stakeholders and Revenue DIVmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies, Performances and Profiling of a Sample of U.S. Universities in 2012

Besana¹,

Esposito²

2015

OJAppS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global economic crisis is affecting performances of not-for-profits. At the same time donors are targeted by a pressing good-cause related marketing, so that the competition for philanthropy is particularly keen. U.S. universities can be public, not-for-profit and for-profit. U.S. not-for-profit universities are confronted with different marketing, fundraising and revenue diversification. Above all, marketing concerns customers and their segmentation and their purchasing-power exploitation; fundraising aims to gain the trustworthiness of donors, instead. The aim of this paper is the analysis of the revenue diversification of a sample of 100 U.S. not-for-profit universities according to IRS (Internal Revenue Service) Forms. These 100 U.S. universities had the highest 2012's revenues for the Guidestar ranking (www.guidestar.org). The cluster analysis gives evidence that the highest gain and the highest solvency are both connected with the implementation of revenue diversification for one profile. The most crowded cluster is the Marketing Expert with the second highest gain.

show abstract

“…Universities can be thought of as ''multi-product firms'' that simultaneously generate knowledge (research), transfer knowledge (public service, technology transfer), and develop human capital (teaching) (Leslie et al 2012). Additionally, the microeconomic foundations of academic and industrial production both utilize land, labor, and capital to generate outputs (Ziman 1991).…”

Section: Academic Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory management, academic production, and the building blocks of academic capitalism

Cantwell

2014

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic capitalism has been among the most influential lines of research into markets in higher education. This paper takes up the distinct but related topic of academic production. This study makes use of a theory of fields and the concept of strategic action fields Fligstein and McAdam (Social Theory 29:1-26, 2011; A theory of fields, Oxford University Press, New York, 2012) and empirical evidence from a qualitative study of laboratory management at three research universities in the US to explore the how microdynamics of academic production may contribute to the establishment and maintenance of academic capitalism.

show abstract

How do Revenue Variations Affect Expenditures Within U.S. Research Universities?

Cited by 74 publications

References 52 publications

Research Universities and The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Competition, Resource Concentration, and the ‘Great Recession’ in the United States

Research Universities and The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Competition, Resource Concentration, and the ‘Great Recession’ in the United States

Strategies, Performances and Profiling of a Sample of U.S. Universities in 2012

Laboratory management, academic production, and the building blocks of academic capitalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About