Neo‐liberal ‘governmentality’ in the English and Japanese higher education systems

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to identify common patterns in central authorities' steering of universities and the institutional power in neo‐liberal higher education regimes. The paper examines the regulatory mechanisms of England and Japan through Foucault's idea of ‘governmentality’ and utilises the concept of autonomy to identify the state‐university nexus and institutional behaviour. The paper argues that the similar application of technologies of arts in England and Japan – such as financial incentives and output quality management – has not brought about the same effect across the two countries in institutional behaviour and culture. In the case of England, the decline of traditional university autonomy – which isolated the university sector from external pressure – and increasing external influence in the value system are the case, while in Japan, the shift is rather internal within an institution, changing from department to institutional autonomy, which is compatible with the concept of accountability.

Keywords:

• neo‐liberalism
• higher education
• England
• Japan
• governmentality
• university autonomy
• policy instruments

Notes

1. National universities were corporatised in 2004.

2. The only exception being the privately run Buckingham University.

3. Foucault uses these terms interchangeably.

4. ‘Governmentality’ is a concept developed by Michel Foucault in the later years of his life, between 1979 and 1984. Foucault elucidated this concept in particular in his lectures at the College de France.

5. The principal‐agent model indicates a hierarchical work relationship that is based upon contracts between two parties metaphysically regarded as a principal and its agent.

6. Rose (1999) argues that to investigate the relationships between the self and power from these perspectives is to document and analyse the ways in which human beings have been made into subjects through various governmental strategies and forms of regulation.

7. Personal communication with Professor Ian McNay 2005.

8. The new funding mechanism has encouraged the institutions to become entrepreneurial, self‐responsible subjects by increasing their fundraising activities. The public funds have been scheduled to decrease by 1% of the total ‘operating cost’ (uneihi kofukin) in the previous year from the 2005/2006 fiscal year.

9. The operating cost is to be linked to the results of performance evaluation in teaching and research after 2010.