nav-icons nav-icons
Progress in Political Economy (PPE) Progress in Political Economy (PPE)
LOGIN REGISTER
LOGIN
REGISTER
linklink
  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
Why sanctions may backfire
Previous
We live in a time of ‘late capitalism’. But what does that mean?
Next

Eight logics of higher education funding in Australia

by Gareth Bryant on January 31, 2023

Eight logics of higher education funding in Australia

Gareth Bryant | January 31, 2023

Tags: | 2 352

In 2023, a panel appointed by the federal government will be conducting a much-needed review of Australia’s higher education system. The recommendations of the panel, led by Professor Mary O’Kane, will feed into the Australian Universities Accord that the federal government has committed to implementing.

It is timely, then, that Sydney University Press has just published a book titled Australian Universities: A Conversation About Public Good. The book is edited by Julia Horne and Matthew A.M. Thomas and features essays by over 20 authors reflecting on different aspects of the role of public universities in Australia’s economy and society. The book is full of ideas about how Australian universities can better advance the public good, and should be compulsory reading for Accord panel members.

One of the key areas for review outlined in the terms of reference for the Accord panel is “Investment and Affordability”. Here the panel has been asked to “Explore funding and contribution arrangements that deliver equity, access, quality and longer-term investments to meet priorities in teaching, research, workforce and infrastructure” and will explicitly review the controversial Job-ready Graduates Package instituted by the previous federal government.

My contribution to the conversation in the book focuses directly on funding arrangements for Australian university students. I take a political economy approach that places university funding within changing economic, budgetary and policy contexts. The main contribution of the chapter is to identify eight distinct logics that are bundled together in the architecture of fees, loans and grants that finance the education of Australian university students:

  1. Fiscal austerity: The logic of fiscal austerity is a near permanent feature of university funding because universities are an expanding part of the modern economy. Without regular efforts to rein in costs, public spending on universities would outpace political goals of “budget discipline”. Fiscal austerity logics sit behind the long-term trend towards increasing student fees and reducing the share of government contributions.
  2. Human capital: Understanding higher education as human capital emphasises higher education as a “private good”. Human capital theory reframed higher education in distinctly economic terms, encouraging students to engage with their education as a process of appreciating their own “capital”. Human capital logics were evident in the introduction of student fees, and have been used to justify differential fee levels between courses with different earnings potentials.
  3. Cost recovery: Cost recovery logics have been implemented as part of the pursuit of “efficiency” in public services. Whereas human capital logics focus on returns on investment for individuals, cost recovery logics are concerned with charging fees to recoup the costs of service delivery. In higher education, this has been translated into efforts to match funding and fees to the efficient “unit cost” of delivering education.
  4. Workforce planning: Workforce planning logics respond to and seek to influence Australia’s labour market requirements. They are applied when differential fee levels and the allocation of places between courses are used to shape the skills profile of graduates. It has been common for governments to selectively decrease fees in areas of study that align with certain “priority” professional pathways, irrespective of their teaching costs or earnings potential.
  5. Status maximisation: Universities primarily compete for students based on institutional status, rather than the price or quality of education. They seek to maximise their positions within status hierarchies, measured by things like international rankings. Status maximising logics are strongest where universities have autonomy over student enrolment patterns and fee levels.
  6. Income-contingency: The design of the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS), the public loan system introduced in 1989 to cover the up-front cost of domestic student fees, is underpinned by a logic of income-contingency. While HECS is presented as a debt, the repayment structure reflects many aspects of the income taxation system. The logic of income-contingency can be applied with different levels of progressivity, depending on the level at which the income threshold is set, and the extent to which repayments reflect ability to pay.
  7. Financial asset: HECS is accounted for as a financial asset on the federal government’s balance sheet. This is highly significant in fiscal terms because, unlike direct grants, the cost of issuing HECS loans is not counted as government expenditure. Governments with fiscal austerity goals therefore have strong incentives to shift the balance of university financing from Commonwealth contributions, funded through grants, to student contributions, funded by loans.
  8. Public good: There is a strong level of support in the community for a broader understanding of universities as a public good. More narrowly, the public good features of university degrees are the “spill over” economic benefits of a more educated workforce, such as higher taxes paid by graduates, as well as increasing productivity and economic growth. However, a broader understanding of universities as a public good focuses on their role in pursuing public missions and addressing inequalities, by promoting social progress, civic participation, and individual opportunity.

In the chapter, I show how the eight logics have been activated to facilitate the expansion of universities over the last 30 years, but with socially uneven outcomes. I demonstrate how they have configured successive funding regimes between 1989 and 2021, identifying turning points in how particular logics have been emphasised, bundled and applied, before reflecting on how the dominant logic of fiscal austerity might give way to that of the public good.

I argue that, as ever, the problem of paying for expansion – not arresting decline – remains the primary challenge facing Australian universities. The eight logics are intended to serve as a map, both for understanding the political economy of the existing funding system, and for navigating what might be changed to facilitate future rounds of expansion on a more equitable and sustainable basis.

Share this post

  • Tweet
  • Share Post:

Author: Gareth Bryant

Gareth Bryant is a political economist at the University of Sydney. He works as a senior lecturer in the Department of Political Economy and as economist-in-residence with the Sydney Policy Lab.

Related Posts

 

Beyond Agrarian Transitions in Africa

In their efforts to industrialise, African states are looking beyond the traditional path of transition from agrarian to industrial economies by seeking to leverage on their natura...

 

What do we learn from engaging in politicised pedagogical and teaching practices?

This post introduces readers to the second Special Issue we have co-edited on the umbrella theme of ‘Politicizing Artistic Pedagogies’. The first Special Issue, entitled ‘Pol...

 

Gonzo as Insurgent Method: Literary Techniques for the Critique of Political Economy II

In August 2017 I travelled to Dayuma, a small town on the Ecuadorian oil frontier. I was conducting research for my recent book on fantastical materialism and post-neoliberal state...

 

Conceptualising struggles over water grabbing

Capital has identified water as an important opportunity for profitable investment. Whether it is the privatisation of public water infrastructure, the expansion of the bottled wat...

Comments

  • Gavin Moodie | Feb 2 2323

    Presumably you cite Norton, Andrew (2002) From public to private benefit: The shifting rationales for setting student contributions. Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, https://melbourne-cshe.unimelb.edu.au/publications/occasional-paper-series

    0 0
  • Gareth Bryant | Feb 2 2323

    Hi Gavin. Thanks for sharing. I’m a big fan of Andrew’s work. I wrote my chapter in 2021 so unfortunately couldn’t cite Andrew’s excellent paper, which wasn’t yet published. But agree it is very complementary!

    0

Leave a Response Cancel reply


Join our mailing list

© Progress in Political Economy (PPE)

Privacy | Designed by Nucleo | Terms and Conditions

  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
 

Loading Comments...