SFeDu
of.211, Gorgoko St., 88 
Rostov-on-Don
Russia
344002
+7 (863) 250-59-54
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
te@sfedu.ru

TERRA ECONOMICUS

  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2015
  • No 2
  • Institutional structure of higher education in Russia: principal concepts and theoretical frameworks

Institutional structure of higher education in Russia: principal concepts and theoretical frameworks

TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 13 (no. 2),
p. 131-142

This paper examines a variety of theoretical concepts and approaches to understanding institutional structures and institutional change. Based on the concepts of original institutionalism and new institutional economics of «late» Douglass North, we attempt to develop a theoretical framework for analyzing the institutional structure of Russian higher education. Institutions and institutional structures in the field of higher education are changing rapidly in the course of reforms. This process determines actors’ behavioral patterns, incentives and values. Actors tend to adjust the effects of institutional change to prevailing values and their own interests by developing alternative behavioral patterns. Although new institutions can be inefficient and problematic, actors often accept them because they are not able to resist, or they just do not understand new institutional structures clearly. Meanwhile, such institutions often lead to hybrid organizations. If a university becomes a hybrid organization, it may fail to overcome the selection barriers created by the government. Therefore, university students, lecturers and staff at all levels need to conform to constantly changing institutional conditions. This article aims at providing a theoretical framework for identifying working rules, incentives and values that influence actors’ behavior in the field.


Keywords: institutional change; institutions; higher education; institutional structure

References:
  • Bulgakova N. (2013a). After the cannonade: University Lecturers are called for «attack». Official portal: Academic Society Weekly Newspaper «Poisk» (http://www.poisknews.ru/theme/edu/8211/). (In Russian).
  • Bulgakova N. (2013b). Faces of the simulacrum. Official portal: Academic Society Weekly Newspaper «Poisk» (http://www.poisknews.ru/theme/science-politic/6808/). (In Russian).
  • Bulgakova N. (2015). University lecturers are encouraged or dismissed: new challenges in achieving effectiveness. Official portal: Academic Society Weekly Newspaper «Poisk» (http://www.poisknews.ru/theme/edu/13884/). (In Russian).
  • Commons J. (2011). Legal Foundations of Capitalism. Moscow: Publishing House of State University Higher School of Economics. (In Russian).
  • Commons J. (2012). Institutional economics. Terra Economicus, vol. 10, № 3, pp. 69–76. (In Russian).
  • Graham L. (2014). Can Russia Compete? The History of Innovations in Imperial, Soviet and Modern Russia. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov and Fiber, OJSC. (In Russian).
  • Kvale S. (2009). The Qualitative Research Interview. Moscow: Smysl Publ. (In Russian).
  • North D. (1997). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Moscow: Nachala Publ. (In Russian).
  • North D. (2000). Five propositions about institutional change. Economic Club Quarterly Bulletin, no. 4, pp. 3–15. (In Russian).
  • North D. (2010). Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Moscow: Publishing House of State University Higher School of Economics. (In Russian).
  • Olson M. (1995). The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Moscow: The Economic Initiative Fund Publ. (In Russian).
  • Strauss A. and Corbin J. (2010). Basics of Qualitative Research. Grounded Theory. Procedures and Techniques. Moscow: KomKniga Publ. (In Russian).
  • Tambovtsev V. (2014). Economics of informal institutions. Moscow: RG-Press. (In Russian).
  • Veblen T. (1984). The Theory of the Leisure Class. Moscow: Progress Publ. (In Russian).
  • Volchik V.V. and Berezhnoi I.V. (2009). Hierarchy and complementarity of institutions within the economic order. Terra Economicus, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 65–73. (In Russian).
  • Volchik V.V. and Berezhnoi I.V. (2012). Otbor i ekzzaptatsiya institutov: rol grupp cpetsialnykh interesov [Selection and Exaptation of Institutions: the Role of Special Interest Groups] / In: Arkhipov A.Yu., Kirdina S.G. and Martishin E.M. (eds.) Evolyutsionnaya i institutsionalnaya ekonomicheskaya teoriya: diskussii, metody i prilozheniya [Evolutionary and Institutional Economic Theory: Discussions, Methods and Implications]. Ch. 8. Saint-Petersburg: Aleteiya Publ., pp. 165–187. (In Russian).
  • Zyryanov V., Kotlobovsky I. and Sinyakov F. (2012). Universities preparedness to implement the Federal State Educational Standards: organizational aspect. Higher Education in Russia, no. 12, pp. 3–13. (In Russian).
  • Acemoglu D. and Robinson J. (2006). Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Acemoglu D. and Robinson J. (2012). The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty: Why Nations Fail. NY: Crown Business.
  • Arthur W.B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, no. 99, pp. 116–131.
  • Bowles S. and Naidu S. (2006). The Persistent Institutions. Working paper, no. 08-04-015. Santa Fe Institute.
  • Brousseau E. and Raynaud E. (2008). Climbing the Hierarchical, Ladders of Rules: The Dynamics of Institutional Frameworks. Working paper, Economix. University of Paris Quest La D´efense.
  • David P.A. (1994). Why Are Institutions the «Carriers of History». Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 205–220.
  • David P.A. (2007). Path Dependence, Its Critics and the Quest for «Historical Economics» / In: Hodgson G.M. (ed.) The Evolution of Economic Institutions: A Critical Reader. Edward Elgar, pp. 120–142.
  • Dequech D. (2013). Economic Institutions: explanations for conformity and room for deviation. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 81–108.
  • Eggertsson T. (1990). Economic behavior and institutions: Principles of Neoinstitutional Economics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Heikkila E.J. (2011). An information perspective on path dependence. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 7, issue 1, pp. 23–45 (doi:10.1017/S1744137410000202.
  • Herrmann-Pillath C. (2006). Endogenous regionalism. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 297–318 (doi:10.1017/s1744137406000427).
  • Hodgson G.M. (2004). The Evolution of Institutional Economics: Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism. Routledge.
  • Kaufman B.E. (2007). The Institutional Economics of John R. Commons: Complement and Substitute for Neoclassical Economic Theory. Socio-Economic Review, vol. 5, pp. 3–45.
  • Kingston C. and Caballero G. (2009). Comparing theories of institutional change. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 5, issue 2, pp. 151–180 (doi:10.1017/S1744137409001283).
  • Krug B. and Hendrischke H. (2010). Market design in Chinese market places. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 525–546 (doi:10.1007/s10490-010-9225-5).
  • Landini F. (2013). Institutional change and information production. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 9, issue 3, pp. 257–284 (doi:10.1017/S1744137413000064).
  • Libecap G.D. (1989). Contracting for Property Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Meyer J.W. and Rowan B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 340–363.
  • Nelson R.R. (1991). Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue (12), pp. 61–74.
  • North D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Olson M. Jr. (1995). The Devolution of the Nordic and Teutonic Economies. American Economic Review, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 22–27.
  • Ostrom E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Pierson P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 251–267.
  • Schmid A.A. (ed.) (2004). Conflict and Cooperation: Institutional and Behavioral Economics (doi:10.1002/9780470773833).
  • Spencer J.W. and Gomez C. (2004). The relationship among national institutional structures, economic factors, and domestic entrepreneurial activity: a multicountry study. Journal of Business Research, no. 57, pp. 1098–1107.
  • Williamson O.E. (2000). The New Institutional Economics: Taking stock, Looking ahead. Journal of economic literature, vol. XXXVIII, pp. 595–613.
Publisher: Southern Federal University
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606