Role of institutional changes in the sphere of higher education in the social-economic development of a region (by the example of Rostov oblast)

Objective: to formulate the principles of reforming the industry and to identify the relationship between the universities reorganization and the indicators of socio-economic development of a region.Methods: questionnaires, in-depth interviews, econometric modeling, supplementation of Balatsky model.Results: the theoretical framework of the current reforms in the sphere of national higher education is, on the one hand, the concept of new public management (NPM), which assumes the implementation of market mechanisms in the management of universities, and on the other hand, the trends and development conditions of knowledge economy - the modern stage of post-industrial society. The article presents the results of the analysis of approaches to the NPM concept, identifies its essential characteristics, as well as features of implementation in the system of higher education, identifies the main causes and vectors of transformations in higher education. In the context of the analyzed scientific works in the modern Western and Russian discourse, much attention is given to the “third mission” of university. Theoretical developments in interrelation between higher education reforms and social and economic development of the region are considered. The results are presented of analysis of organizational change and evaluation of the contribution of the reformed universities in the regional economy by the example of Rostov region, obtained from questionnaires and in-depth interviews and using a modified Balatsky model. Conclusions about the problems of the reforms from the viewpoint of teaching and managing personnel of the reformed universities are formulated. Scientific novelty: the conceptual conclusions of the authors allow supplementing the original institutional theory in the field of the relationship between institutional changes and economic development, including the proposed application of Balatsky model for quantitative metrics of the resulting effects of changes in higher education in the socio-economic development of a region. Practical significance: the research results have potential application in the development of reforms in the framework of the action plan (roadmap) of the government of the Russian Federation “Changes in social sphere aimed at improving the efficiency of education and science”.

NPM, Socio-economic aspects of higher education development, Higher education, Reorganization of universities, Knowledge economy, NPM, Institutional changes, Economic development of a region

1. Hood C. The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme // Accounting, Organizations and Society. 1995. Vol. 20, № 2-3. Pp. 93-109. DOI: 10.1016/0361-3682(93)e0001-w

2. Osborne S. P. The new public governance? // Public Management Review. September 2006. № 8 (3). Pp. 377-387. DOI: 10.1080/14719030600853022

3. Brücker H., Rother N., Schupp J. IAB-BAMF-SOEP-Befragung von Geflüchteten: Überblick und erste Ergebnisse. DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt, 2016. № 116.

4. Ефимов В. С. Университет в ситуации постиндустриального перехода: глобальные тренды и вызовы развития. Университет 4.0 // Современный университет между глобальными вызовами и локальными задачами. VII Международная конференция Российской ассоциации исследователей высшего образования: сб. материалов / под ред. Д. В. Козлова, Н. Г. Малошонок; Нац. исслед. ун-т «Высшая школа экономики», Ин-т образования. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2016.

5. Rustin M. The neoliberal university and its alternatives // Soundings. 2016. Vol. 63, № 63. Pp. 147-176. DOI: 10.3898/136266216819377057

6. Alesina A., Giuliano P. Culture and institutions // Journal of Economic Literature. 2015. Vol. 53, № 4. Pp. 898-944. DOI: 10.1257/jel.53.4.898

7. Jensen W. A. Erich Fromm's Contribution to Sociological Theory, Kalamazoo (Printmill), 2017. 236 p.

8. De Boer H. F., Enders J., Schimank U. Comparing higher education governance systems in four European countries // Governance and performance of education systems. Springer, Dordrecht, 2008. Pp. 35-54. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6446-3_3

9. De Boer H., Enders J., Schimank U. On the way towards new public management? The governance of university systems in England, the Netherlands, Austria, and Germany // New forms of governance in research organizations. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007. Pp. 137-152. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5831-8_5

10. Bauer M. et al. Sustainability Governance at Universities: Using a Governance Equalizer as a Research Heuristic // Higher Education Policy. 2018. Vol. 31, № 4. Pp. 491-511. DOI: 10.1057/s41307-018-0104-x

11. Enders J., de Boer H., Leišytė L. New public management and the academic profession: The rationalisation of academic work revisited // The changing face of academic life. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2009. Pp. 36-57. DOI: 10.1057/9780230242166_3

12. Jongbloed B., Enders J., Salerno C. Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda // Higher Education. 2008. Vol. 56, № 3. Pp. 303-324. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-008-9128-2

13. Schwab K. The fourth industrial revolution. Currency, 2017.

14. Yusuf S., Nabeshima K. How universities promote economic growth. The World Bank, 2006.

15. Slaughter S., Leslie L. L. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2715 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218-4319, 1997.

16. Kagermann H., Lukas W. D., Wahlster W. Industrie 4.0: Mit dem Internet der Dinge auf dem Weg zur 4. industriellen Revolution // VDI Nachrichten. 2011. Vol. 13, № 1.

17. O'reilly T. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software // Communications & Strategies. 2007. № 1. P. 17.

18. Teece D. J. Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets // California Management Review. 1998. Vol. 40, № 3. Pp. 55-79. DOI: 10.2307/41165943

19. Porat M. U. The information economy: definition and measurement. 1977.

20. Tapscott D. The digital economy: Promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996. 342 p.

21. Kuznets S. S. et al. Economic growth of nations. 1971.

22. Etzkowitz H. et al. The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm // Research Policy. 2000. Vol. 29, № 2. Pp. 313-330. DOI: 10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00069-4

23. Schultz T. W. Education and Productivity. 1971.

24. Denison E. F. Trends in American Economic Growth 1929-1982. Washington: The Brooking Institution, 1985, XXV + 141 p.

25. Maddison A. A long-run perspective on saving // The Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 1992. Vol. 2, № 2. Pp. 181-196. DOI: 10.2307/3440445

26. Romer P. M. Increasing returns and long-run growth // Journal of Political Economy. 1986. Vol. 94, № 5. Pp. 1002-1037. DOI: 10.1086/261420

27. Lucas Jr. R. E. On the mechanics of economic development // Journal of Monetary Economics. 1988. Vol. 22, № 1. Pp. 3-42. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7

28. Barro R. J. Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth // Journal of Political Economy. 1990. Vol. 98, № 5. Part 2. Pp. S103-S125. DOI: 10.1086/261726

29. Autor D. H., Katz L. F., Krueger A. B. Computing inequality: have computers changed the labor market? // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1998. Vol. 113, № 4. Pp. 1169-1213. DOI: 10.1162/003355398555874

30. Веблен Т. Теория праздного класса / пер. с англ., вступ. ст. С. Т. Сорокиной, общ. ред. В. В. Мотылева. М.: Прогресс, 1984.

31. Веблен Т. Инженеры и ценовая система. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2018.

32. Медушевский Н. А., Перфильева О. В. Интерпретация третьей роли университетов на современном этапе // Вестник РГГУ. Серия: Политология. История. Международные отношения. 2016. № 3 (5). С. 19-31. DOI: 10.28995/2073-6339-2016-3-19-31

33. Национальные модели технологического развития: сравнительный анализ / Е. В. Балацкий, С. Е. Ушакова, В. А. Малахов, М. А. Юревич // Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2017. Т. 9, № 4. C. 37-51. DOI: 10.17835/2076-6297.2017.9.4.037-051

34. Балацкий Е. В., Юревич М. А. Прогнозирование эффективности российской экономики на основе научно- технологического баланса // Наука. Инновации. Образование. 2018. № 2 (28).

35. Балацкий Е. В., Екимова Н. А. Российская модель сопряжения академической результативности и образовательного потенциала регионов // Известия Уральского государственного экономического университета. 2017. Т. 73, № 5. DOI: 10.29141/2073-1019-2017-17-5-9

36. Вольчик В. В., Савко П. О., Маскаев А. И. Комплементарность институциональных и организационных изменений в контексте реорганизации вузов // Journal of Institutional Studies (Журнал институциональных исследований). 2018. Т. 10, № 4. С. 156-172. DOI: 10.17835/2076-6297.2018.10.4.156-172

37. Жук А. А. Изменения организационных механизмов сферы высшего образования: анализ институциональной комплементарности // Journal of Economic Regulation. 2018. Т. 10, № 4. С. 205-213. DOI: 10.17835/2078-5429.2018.9.4.205-213

38. Трансакционные издержки в высшем образовании в контексте организационных и институциональных изменений / В. В. Вольчик, П. О. Савко, М. А. Корытцев, А. А. Оганесян, А. И. Маскаев // Journal of Economic Regulation. 2018. Т. 9, № 3. С. 57-68. DOI: 10.17835/2078-5429.2018.9.3.057-068

39. Вольчик В. В., Жук А. А., Корытцев М. А. Конкурентная среда рынка высшего образования Ростовской области // Terra Economicus. 2017. Т. 15, № 3. C. 178-196.

40. Вольчик В. В., Зотова Т. А. Адаптивная рациональность и экономическое поведение в эволюционном контексте // Terra Economicus. 2011. Т. 9, № 4. С. 54-64.

41. Pillar Universities in Russia: The Rise of “the Second Wave” / T. Lisitskaya, P. Taranov, E. Ugnich, V. Pislyakov // arXiv preprint arXiv: 1809.00248, 2018.