以政策企業家模式做為大學自主權規劃之研究:大學自主政策制定歷程之個案探討 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)6. 8 National ChengChi University Department of Education Ph. D. Dissertation. Supervisor: Dr. Mu-Jin Chen .. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Policy Entrepreneurship as an Emerging Autonomy for. ‧. Universities in Taiwan:. y. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. a Case Study of University Autonomy on Policy Processes. 8. Ch. i Un. v. 2,. i e n g c h,. : Doctoral Candidate: Yu-Ching Hsu 6 ) O 5 2015 November 1. ). :8.

(2) Policy Entrepreneurship as an Emerging Autonomy for Universities in Taiwan: a Case Study of University Autonomy on Policy Processes. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 政by 治大立 Yu-Ching Hsu. sit. y. Nat. er. io. A Dissertation Submitted to the. n. al Department of Education iv. Un i e h n c g National Cheng Chi University. Ch. In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education. Written under the direction of Dr. Mu-Jin Chen 2015.11.9 2.

(3) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT That is a long but rich trip. From 2009 to 2014, several mentors and great opportunities lead me to explore the reality and beauty of public policies. The dissertation is my record of this precious journey. First, I should appreciate Emerald Group Publishing Limited; part of my dissertation was published in the book “Public Policy and Governance”. By this book, I can share my implication about policy entrepreneurship with global researchers and practitioners. Most important of all, I should appreciate my advisor’s instruction and support. Dr. Mu-Jin Chen has great experience in higher education policies and excellent academic background. His seminars always inspire us to have in-depth concept about research. Also, my committee members are mentors to me. From submitting research proposal to conducting the final defense, Professor Ru-Jer Wang, Professor Pang-Chieh Lin, Professor Wen-Liuh Lin, and Professor Shi-Huei Ho gave me great advice and support. My committee members come from various expertise and that combination is quite 治 for me to join their interdisciplinary 政 valuable conversation.. 大. 立. ‧ 國. 學. Also, I am grateful to my colleagues and mentors in Ministry of Education. First, I appreciate. ‧. that Dr.Ni provides me with the great opportunity to join several innovative projects of higher. sit. y. Nat. education. Those projects stimulate me to liberate issues of higher education and experience. er. io. the substance of education and policy formation. Director Feng, one of my respectful mentors,. n. shares lots of global perspectives with a me. And Deputy Minister v Lu, Director Hung, Director. l C ni U h Lee, Director Ma and Senior Specialist Wang, and encouragement is important to i e ntheir g c hadvice me.. And I should appreciate my mentors in universities. President Ho, Professor Chen, Professor Chou, Professor Liu, and Professor Tsai are great mentors to me as well. All of them have great wisdom in public policies and they are generous to share their experience with junior scholars. I can’t finish this dissertation just by domestic mentors and resources. It is so lucky to have several global partners’ and experts’ support. The great curriculum and excellent instruction from Dr. Evan Berman broadens my view on global public policy. Last, my family members and friends are important companions to me on the road of academic career. Charmaine, Wilson, Wonwon, Only, and Janet, thank you for your companion and encouragement. And without my family members, I can’t achieve all of these milestones in life. 3.

(4) TABLE OF CONTENT CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 10 1.1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 10 1.2.0 Research background .......................................................................................................... 11 1.3.0 Conceptual framework and research questions ................................................................... 12 1.4.0 Research scope and limitation ............................................................................................. 14 1.5.0 Terms of definition .............................................................................................................. 14 CHAPTER2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE........................................................................... 15 2.1.0 Role of policy entrepreneurs in policy formation ............................................................... 15 2.1.1 Policy entrepreneurs for policy innovation ......................................................................... 15 2.1.2 Policy entrepreneurs for citizens’ participation................................................................... 18 2.1.3 Policy entrepreneurs for networking governance 治 ................................................................20. 政. 大 2.1.4 Research gap of policy entrepreneurs in Asia ..................................................................... 21. 立. ‧ 國. 學. 2.2.0 Theoretical concept and traits of policy entrepreneurs ....................................................... 26 2.2.1 Theoretical gap of policy entrepreneurs .............................................................................. 28. ‧. 2.3.0 Policy context for policy entrepreneurs............................................................................... 29. y. Nat. 2.3.1 Pattern of interaction between governments and universities ............................................. 29. io. sit. 2.4.0 Policy entrepreneur in cultural dynamics ............................................................................ 32. er. 2.5.0 University autonomy in OECD, WB and EUA................................................................... 36. n. a. v. i l C in Taiwan ................................................................. 2.6.0 Policy formation of higher education 39 Un. hengchi. CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHOD ........................................................................................... 42 3.1.0 Justification of case study.................................................................................................... 42 3.2.0 Conceptual framework ........................................................................................................ 42 3.2.1 Variables for a problem stream ........................................................................................... 42 3.2.2 Variables for a politics stream ............................................................................................. 44 3.2.3 Variables for a policy stream............................................................................................... 46 3.3.0 Data collection..................................................................................................................... 48 3.3.1 Pilot interview ..................................................................................................................... 49 3.3.2 Participant observation ........................................................................................................ 50 3.3.3 Documentary analysis ......................................................................................................... 53 3.4.0 Creditability, validity and ethic rules .................................................................................. 54. 4.

(5) CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS ......................................................................................... 56 4.1 Outline of case analysis .......................................................................................................... 56 4.2 Case 1. ”University Corporations Project” from Ministry of Education. (2002-2007) ............................................................................................................................ 58 4.2.1 Case description .................................................................................................................. 58 4.2.2 Politics stream ..................................................................................................................... 61 4.2.3 Problem stream .................................................................................................................... 67 4.2.4 Policy stream ....................................................................................................................... 69 4.3 Case 2: “University Autonomous Governance Project” from National Cheng Kung University (2008-2014) ........................................................................................................ 74 4.3.1 Case description .................................................................................................................. 74 4.3.2 Politics stream ..................................................................................................................... 77 4.3.3 Problem stream .................................................................................................................... 83 4.3.4 Policy stream ....................................................................................................................... 86. 政治. 4.4.0 Discussion of result ............................................................................................................. 89 大. 立. ‧ 國. 學. CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS ................................................................. 98 5.1.0 Findings on research questions............................................................................................ 98. ‧. 5.2.0 Implication......................................................................................................................... 104. sit. y. Nat. 5.3.0 Academic contribution and future research....................................................................... 107. er. io. REFERENCE ............................................................................................................................... 109. n. AppendixI ................................................................................................................................... 113 a v. l. ni. Ch AppendixII.................................................................................................................................. 137 en hi U gc. AppendixIII ................................................................................................................................ 139 AppendixIV ................................................................................................................................ 150. 5.

(6) LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Comparison between project from MOE and that from NCKU………….…….....11 Table 2!Literature on policy entrepreneurs who transform conventional policies ...……....16 Table 3!Literature on policy entrepreneurs leading unprecedented issues ………..…........18 Table 4 Literature on policy entrepreneurs facilitating citizens’ participation.……….…...19 Table 5 Policy entrepreneurs for networking governance ………………………………...21 Table 6 Literature of Asian policy entrepreneur ……………………………….……….…22 Table 7 Literature on policy entrepreneur in Western countries……………..……………24 Table 8 University autonomy in OECD, WB, EUA ……………………………….….…39 Table 9!Sources and utility of data collection…………………………………….........…..49 Table 10 Background of interviewees ……………………………………………........….50 Table 11 Occasions of participant observation ……………………………….………...…51 政治. 大. Table 12 Dates and participants of立 public focus groups in NCKU ……………………..…52. ‧ 國. 學. Table 13 Important events of “University Corporations Project”……………..……….…..60 Table 14 Important events of “University Autonomous Governance Project” ………..….77. ‧. Table 15 Comparison of policy entrepreneurs’ strategies in a politics stream ……………92. Nat. sit. y. Table 16 Comparison of policy entrepreneurs’ strategies in a problem stream ………..…94. n. al. er. io. Table 17 Comparison of policy entrepreneurs’ strategies in a policy stream …...……..…97. Ch. n engchi U. 6. iv.

(7) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1!Theoretical concept and traits of policy entrepreneurs …………..……...…..…...28 Figure 2!Regional dynamics of culture ………………………..……………………....…..33 Figure 3 Global dynamics of culture ………………….…..……………………………….34 Figure 4 Domestic dynamics of culture …………………..……………………….….…...36 Figure 5 Policy formation of higher education in Taiwan …………………………….…..41 Figure 6 Variables for a problem stream …………………………………………….……44 Figure 7 Variables for a politics stream ……………………………………………..……46 Figure 8 Variables for a policy stream ……………………………………….…….……..47 Figure 9!Outline of case analysis ………………………………………………….…..….57 Figure 10 Strategies of policy entrepreneurs from the MOE ………………………....73 Figure 11 Strategies of policy entrepreneurs from NCKU ……………………….………89. 治. Figure 12 Variables in a politics stream 政 ……………………………………………….....100 大 Figure 13 Variables in a problem立 stream …………………………………………….…..102. ‧ 國. 學. Figure 14 Variables in a policy stream…………………………………….…………..... 104. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. n engchi U. 7. iv.

(8) ABSTRACT While governments expect citizens’ participation to improve public policies, top-down policymaking in higher education still dominates conventional practice in East Asia (Baiocchi, 2005; Genro, 1995). Unconventional cases have emerged since 2000. When most higher education institutions abided by the policy formulation dominated by their governments, a few universities led policy formulation in East Asia. This phenomenon reflects the emerging role of policy entrepreneurs, a concept derived from political science theory. The theory of policy entrepreneurship is relevant to institutional leaders (such as university presidents) and others seeking to introduce, translate and implement innovative ideas into the public sector (Kingdon, 1995). This study explores two comparative longitudinal cases studies involving policy entrepreneurs inside and outside government in Taiwan. From 2003 to 2007, the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Taiwan played the role 治 entrepreneur to initiate the “University 政of policy. 大. Corporation Project”. And from 2008 立to 2014, as a policy entrepreneur outside the. ‧ 國. 學. government, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) took the lead and proposed the “University Autonomous Governance Project”. This project sought an alternative solution. ‧. based on public universities’ needs to improve university autonomy and accountability.. sit. y. Nat. er. io. These cases allowed for a comparison of the strategies of policy entrepreneurs inside and. n. outside the government and their impacts a on policy formulation. v In both cases, policy. l C ni U h entrepreneurs sought to break through the traditional structure by transferring or i e n g c hinstitutional. seeking significant strategic planning by universities themselves. This study shows how these two cases of increased policy formulation provide options for university autonomy in East Asia, causing universities and their leaders to exhibit greater policy entrepreneurship and effectiveness in policymaking. 1. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a politics stream? Do they adopt different strategies? 2. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a problem stream? Do they adopt different strategies? 3. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a policy stream? Do they adopt different strategies? This case study adopts the multiple streams theory for constructing the framework. Multiple methods are undertaken in this study, including interviews, documentary analysis 8.

(9) and participant observation. After case analysis, this study constructs propositions for research questions aforementioned. 1.. To both policy entrepreneurs, political coalition is the goal in a politics stream, but they should go through a multiple-principals competition as a prerequisite of political buffering. In order to attain effective power coalition, policy entrepreneurs adopted diverse strategies of power sharing. Their strategies are implemented in following steps, inclusive of obtaining information from critical stakeholders, persuading targeted stakeholders, and devising format of delegated power. However, policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments have identical goals, face similar prerequisite but adopted diverse strategies in a politics stream.. 2.. To policy entrepreneurs, gaining stakeholders’ problem preference is the goal in a. 治 problem stream, but they should meet政 the requirement on legitimacy of identity, a 大. contextualized prerequisite. In 立 order to obtain stakeholders’ problem preference, policy. ‧ 國. 學. entrepreneurs demonstrate legitimacy of content by various strategies, which contain flexibility of issue framing and acuity of stakeholders. However, policy entrepreneurs. ‧. from universities and governments have identical goals, face similar prerequisite but. sit. y. Nat. adopted diverse strategies in a politics stream. However, policy entrepreneurs from. n. diverse strategies in a problem astream. l. er. io. universities and governments have identical goals, face similar prerequisite but adopted. Ch. 3.. n engchi U. iv. To policy entrepreneurs, creating or seizing a window of policy is the goal of a policy stream. First, they should go through a contextualized prerequisite of political acceptability in a policy stream. After meeting the requirement above, policy entrepreneurs adopted strategies to demonstrate technological feasibility, consisting of scope of reform, available workforce and option of alternatives. However, policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments have identical goals, face similar prerequisite but adopted diverse strategies in a policy stream.. On the basis of propositions aforementioned, this study provides policy makers and potential researchers with implications about policy formation and future research. Keywords: policy process, policy entrepreneurs, multiple streams framework, higher education. 9.

(10) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1.0 Introduction “The expansion of democratic regimes in the past 30 years has increased citizens’ and stakeholders’ direct access to many decision-making processes and forums” (Avritzer, 2002; Grindle, 2000; Heller, 2000). However, the International Institute for Educational Planning IIEP. notes that tradition or models of management in East Asian countries often restrict. the reforms of governance and management structures (Varghese & Martin, 2014). As a result, higher education institutions lack capable leadership in setting policy agendas and acting with greater autonomy nowadays. While governments expect citizens’ participation to improve public policies, top-down policymaking in higher education still dominates conventional practice in East Asia (Baiocchi, 2005; Genro, 1995). Unconventional cases have emerged since 2000. When most higher education institutions abided by the policy formulation dominated by their governments, a few universities 治led policy formulation in East Asia. This. 政. 大 a concept derived from phenomenon reflects the emerging role of policy entrepreneurs,. 立. ‧ 國. 學. political science theory. The theory of policy entrepreneurship is relevant to institutional leaders (such as university presidents) and others seeking to introduce, translate and. ‧. implement innovative ideas into the public sector (Kingdon, 1995).. y. Nat. er. io. sit. This study explores two comparative longitudinal cases studies involving policy entrepreneurs. n. inside and outside government in Taiwan. From 2003 to 2007, a v the Ministry of Education. i. l. C h entrepreneurUtoninitiate the “University (MOE) in Taiwan played the role of policy i e. ngch. Corporation Project”. Through this innovative project, the MOE sought to transform all national universities in Taiwan into independent entities, gaining them more autonomy and increasing their accountability as well. From 2008 to 2014, as a policy entrepreneur outside the government, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) took the lead and proposed the “University Autonomous Governance Project”. This project sought an alternative solution based on public universities’ needs to improve university autonomy and accountability. These cases allowed for a comparison of the strategies of policy entrepreneurs inside and outside the government and their impacts on policy formulation. In both cases, policy entrepreneurs sought to break through the traditional institutional structure by transferring or seeking significant strategic planning by universities themselves. By this comparison, this study expects to explore a new pattern of policy formation.. 10.

(11) Table 1 briefly compares these two projects. This study shows how these two cases of increased policy formulation provide university with university autonomy in East Asia, causing universities and their leaders to exhibit greater policy entrepreneurship and effectiveness in policymaking. Table 1 Comparison between project from the MOE and that from NCKU Ministry of Education. Period of time Range of application. Pursuits. University Autonomous Governance Project. 2003-2007. 2008-2013. All national universities. National Cheng Kung University. 治. 政 with Providing national universities 立 by independent identities transforming them into university corporations.. 大Solving major problems of university governance via gradual approaches.. 學. ‧. Source: Author. University Corporation Project. ‧ 國. Project. National Cheng Kung University. y. Nat. er. io. sit. 1.2.0 Research background. n. Since 1990, eleven governments a series of higher a in East Asia have conducted v. l. ni. C h of university education reforms, among which the reform e n h i U autonomy is the most significant. gc. one. Japan, Korea, Singapore, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia, Lao and Vietnam are participants of this reform. Through policy legalization or administrative arrangements, they either transformed universities as independent entities or infused more autonomy into these higher education institutions (Raza, 2010). The reform involves governments delegating autonomy of decision-making to universities for diverse matters of academic performance, finance, staffing matters and institutional governance (Estermann & Noakkala, 2010; Mok, 2006; Varghese & Martin, 2014). Nevertheless, after these reforms, East Asian universities only obtained operational autonomy designed by their governments, and that autonomy had only limited effect on universities. According to a survey from the IIEP in 2013, national level administrators and university teaching staff in East Asia noted less complex and faster decision-making in a number of operational matters (Varghese & Martin, 2014). It is clear that the reform led to less 11.

(12) significant positive feedback about improvement on research and teaching. The latest report from the World Bank (WB) also points out that there are still severe ‘disconnects’ in the higher education systems in East Asia. These disconnects exist between higher education and the following communities, inclusive of employers, companies, research institutions, training providers, and secondary education institutions (World Bank, 2011). Obviously, these reforms of university autonomy still can’t improve the stagnation of higher education in this region. Since the higher education policies designed by governments didn’t work well, why not delegating the power of policy formulation to universities directly? Researchers in institutionalism suggest that stakeholders within institutional structures sometimes do initiate reforms and changes (Barzelay & Gallego, 2006; Eggertsson, 1990; Ostrom, 1990; Scott, 2001). Also, they understand the rule of games and the advantage to propel policy change (Eggertsson, 1990; Mintrom&Norman, 2009). In addition to scholars from institutionalism, the wave of democratization has been accompanied 政治by the spread of new institutions that. 大. facilitates citizens to participate in policy 立 formation (Wampler, 2009). Governments also. ‧ 國. 學. expect citizens’ participation can improve the efficiency of governments and leveling up the quality of democracy (Baiocchi, 2005; Genro, 1995). Achieving this involves needs for. ‧. greater strategic planning, quality assurance, and policy coordination, all of which have been. er. io. sit. y. Nat. traditionally retained by central governments (Varghese & Martin, 2014).. n. a l the power of policyi vformulation may be much needed In comparison to operational autonomy,. n. C. U h e n gtheir by higher education institutions to fully develop to respond to a c h istrengths,. knowledge-based economy, and to compete with other universities in a global context. The “University Autonomous Governance Project” initiated by NCKU in Taiwan is not a single case. In Korea, Seoul National University has introduced its policy about university corporatization since 2009. Policy entrepreneurship has rarely been found in East Asian higher education, yet they also show potential solutions for the stagnation of higher education policy innovations in this area. Therefore, this study can be generalized in East Asia as well since policy entrepreneurs have emerged to propose their policy agenda of higher education.. 1.3.0 Conceptual framework and research questions Higher education scholars have increasingly relied on the conceptual body of literature produced by political science and public policy scholars to explain policymaking phenomena (Lesile & Novak, 2003; McLendon, 2003). When it comes to systematic analysis of policymaking, especially policy formulation, there exists very limited research in social 12.

(13) policies, not to mention education policies. That demonstrates why this study selects a political science theory as the research framework for higher education policy. This study adopts the multiple streams theory for constructing the framework. Kingdon (1995) offers a dynamic set of policy processes in his “multiple streams framework”. Unlike previous concepts of policy process, he propels that policymaking contains dynamic movements from problem, solution/policy and politics streams. The theory contends that these streams operate in a parallel manner, rather than a sequential pattern. Kingdon presents the premise that a government is an organized anarchy with fluid participation, problematic preferences, and unclear technology (Kingdon, 1995; Zahariadis, 2007). A policy entrepreneur, the major concept applied in this study, represents the role who joins these problem, solution/policy and politics streams for propelling policy agenda; policy entrepreneurs not only try to gain support 政 from the治 public or pressure groups, but to magnify. 大. the effect of administrative or legislative 立 turnover. Like entrepreneurs in market, policy. ‧ 國. 學. entrepreneurs master political coalition, marketing problems and proposing solutions. Before reaching the formal agenda, policy entrepreneurs are also capable of seizing policy window,. ‧. an opportunity to put the solution into practice by authorities (Kingdon, 1995; Zahariadis,. sit. y. Nat. 2007). The concept of policy entrepreneurs can be applied in a democratic system, but also. er. io. the countries without election or free media (Hammond, 2013).. al. n. v ni C U h This study aims at constructing the model ofeAsian h i entrepreneurs by inquiring n g c policy following research questions.. 1. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a politics stream? Do they adopt different strategies? 2. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a problem stream? Do they adopt different strategies?. 3. How policy entrepreneurs from universities and governments go through a policy stream? Do they adopt different strategies?. 13.

(14) 1.4.0 Research scope and limitation As to the research scope, for the dissertation is based on two longitudinal cases from 2002 to 2015 in Taiwan. Even though except policy entrepreneurs, there may be other forces that led to policy change, this study target at the micro phenomena policy entrepreneurs produced. The phenomenon encompasses actions they take and the interactions among other constituents they conduct.. 1.5.0 Terms of definition 1.. Policy formulation Power retained to the central governments, encompasses strategic planning, and collaboration among ministries (Varghese, 2013).. 2.. Multiple stream framework. 治. 政process, this大theory depicts policy formation as a Unlike previous concepts for policy 立. dynamic movement. Policy makers should couple streams of politics, problems and. ‧ 國. 學. policies; then they can propose pet solution to formal agenda. After that, before. ‧. reaching the formal agenda, policy makers also need to wait for the policy window,. sit. al. n. Policy entrepreneurs. er. io. 3.. y. Nat. opportunity to show the solution or problem (Kingdon, 1995).. iv. Policy entrepreneurs represent C theh role joining these U n problem, solution/policy and. engchi. politics streams for propelling their policy agenda.. 14.

(15) CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE This chapter elaborates four issues on the basis of literature review. First, who is a policy entrepreneur? In terms of policy formation, the role of a policy entrepreneur is introduced in the first section. Secondly, where is a policy entrepreneur located? Influential contextual elements for policy entrepreneurs are discussed in the second section. In the third part, why we need policy entrepreneurs? This study discusses why policy entrepreneurship can be taken as an alternative of university autonomy in Asia. Last, the development of policy formation in Taiwan is introduced.. 2.1.0 Role of policy entrepreneurs in policy formation In terms of policy formation, policy entrepreneurs have played critical roles in policy innovation (Brouwer, 2008; Botterill, 2013; Crow, 2010; Hammond, 2013; Mintrom, 2000; Mintrom, 2013; Wampler, 2007; Zhu, 2008), networking 治 governance (Lu, 2009; Mintrom, 2013; Wang. 政. 大 Hsung, 2012) and citizens’ participation (Avritzer, 2002; Grindle, 2000; Heller,. 立. ‧ 國. 學. 2000; Shah, 2007). Relevant research findings are discussed in following sections.. ‧. 2.1.1 Policy entrepreneurs for policy innovation. y. Nat. Base on research findings from 1997 to 2015, policy entrepreneurs have transformed. io. sit. conventional policies in various fields, inclusive of urban vagrant management (Zhu, 2008),. n. al. er. participatory budget (Wampler, 2007), water management (Brouwer, 2011; Crow, 2010),. iv. C h and solution prevention of drought crisis (Botterill, 2013), U nof urban poverty (Hammond,. engchi. 2013). In comparison to traditional policy makers, policy entrepreneurs adopt innovative patterns of communication, unprecedented strategies and new combination of task force to deal with conventional public issues. Extant literature identified innovative communication patterns of policy entrepreneurs. As table 2 illustrates, Zhu (2008) found policy entrepreneurs adopted ‘‘technically infeasible strategy’’ in China, an authoritative regime, to appeal political leaders’ attention successfully. Further, Botterill (2013) indicated policy entrepreneurs make progress incrementally as opportunities arise. As to unprecedented strategies, Huitema, Lebel. Meijerink (2011). through a multi-national research, identified policy entrepreneurs’ unique strategies on policy change. Furthermore, Wampler (2007) analyzed the reason why policy entrepreneurs are willing to propel innovative strategies; he identified that policy entrepreneurs are more likely 15.

(16) to make efforts in innovative policies than their policy advocates and pro forma adopter counterparts due to the specific payoffs to them. The rest of research focuses on the new combination of task force. By researching policy water rights in Colorado, Crow (2010) found policy entrepreneurs with profession play an influential role in policy change within their area of expertise. In an authoritative regime, Hammond (2013) explored public officers initiated to act as innovative policy entrepreneurs to solve urban poverty. Table 2 Literature on policy entrepreneurs who transform conventional policies No. Topic Author Research findings Country. 立. 政. Botteril. Policy entrepreneurs adopted ‘‘technically infeasible strategy’’ to appeal political 治leaders’ attention. 大 Policy entrepreneurs can make progress incrementally as opportunities arise.. 學. 2. Zhu. ‧ 國. 1. Strategy of Chinese policy entrepreneurs in the third sector: challenges of ‘‘Technical Infeasibility’’ Are policy entrepreneurs really decisive in achieving policy change? Drought policy in USA and Australia. China. U.S. and Australia. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Policy entrepreneurs are more likely to make efforts to 3 Brazil a lWampler innovative v policies than their i Ch policy nadvocates and pro engchi U forma adopter counterparts. The strategies of policy Policy entrepreneurs adopted Huitema, entrepreneurs in water diverse strategies to lead 15 4 Lebel transitions around the policy change on water countries Meijerink world transition. Policy entrepreneurs with Policy entrepreneurs, issue profession play an influential 5 experts, and water rights Crow U.S. role in policy change within policy change in Colorado their area of expertise. In an authoritative regime, Policy entrepreneurship in public officers initiated to act 6 China’s response to urban Hammond as innovative policy China poverty entrepreneurs to solve urban poverty. Source: Adapted from (Botterill, 2013; Crow, 2010; Hammond, 2013; Wampler, 2007; Zhu, 2008) Following the footsteps of policy entrepreneurs: policy advocates and pro forma adopters. 16.

(17) In addition to transforming conventional policies, policy entrepreneurs are also emerging leaders to conduct new social issues as well, such as knowledge economy (Mintrom, 2013), stem cell research (Mintrom, 2009) and school choices (Heise, 2012; Mintrom, 1997). As table 3 illustrates, knowledge economy, stem cell research, and school choice prevail in public policies nowadays, but those issues are unprecedented to most policy makers. First, new issues emerge from changing context; extant researchers indicated policy entrepreneurs master interacting with their context. Mintrom (2013) explored policy entrepreneurs’ initiatives of knowledge economy in Australia; he indicated policy entrepreneurs are more competent than political actors in negotiating their context. Moreover, Mintrom (2009) also researched the role of policy entrepreneurs in the human embryonic stem cell research in Italy and the United Kingdom; he found policy entrepreneurs could propose appropriate strategies for those high tech issues.. 治 Not only handling new issues in time, policy are also capable of diffusing new 政entrepreneurs 大. ideas. As to the diffusion of school choice, 立 Heise (2012) found Republican governors, defined. ‧ 國. 學. as policy entrepreneurs in his research, increased a state’s likelihood of passing charter school legislation by successful diffusion. As to diffusing creative ideas among team members,. ‧. Mintrom (1997) found policy entrepreneurs significantly raise the probability of legislative. sit. y. Nat. consideration and approval of school choice. As relevant research findings demonstrate,. n. al. er. io. policy entrepreneurs master conducting and diffusing those innovative issues.. Ch. n engchi U. 17. iv.

(18) Table 3 Literature on policy entrepreneurs leading unprecedented issues No. Topic Author Relevant research findings. 1. Policy entrepreneurship, creative teamwork and policy change. 2. Policy entrepreneurs and controversial science: Governing human embryonic stem cell research. 3. Law and policy entrepreneurs: empirical evidence on the expansion of school choice policy. 立. Country. Mintrom. Some policy entrepreneurs are more competent than others at negotiating their operating context.. Australia. Mintrom. Policy entrepreneurs can interact with the operating context well and can propose appropriate strategies for those high tech issues.. Italy and UK. Heise. Republican governors increased a state’s likelihood of U.S. passing charter school legislation.. 政治大 Policy entrepreneurs. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. significantly raise the 4 Mintrom probability of legislative U.S. consideration and approval of school choice. Source: Adapted from (Heise, 2012; Mintrom, 1997; Mintrom, 2009; Mintrom, 2013) Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. sit. y. Nat. er. io. 2.1.2 Policy entrepreneurs for citizens’ participation. n. When citizens expect to involvea lin public affairs more,i vpolicy entrepreneurs act as. Un. Ch. g c h i facilitates citizens to participate in facilitators for them. Though the expansion e ofndemocracy policy formation (Avritzer, 2002; Grindle, 2000; Heller, 2000; Shah, 2007), most goals of policy formulation are still elites-oriented. Gradually, the failure of democracy results in a series of social movements (Du Chen, 2007; Hsu, 2004). The phenomenon aforementioned triggered the emergence of policy entrepreneurs who facilitate civil participation and emphasize citizens-oriented agenda. As table 4 illustrates, policy entrepreneurs can facilitate stakeholders’ cooperation. Huitema, Lebel Meijerink (2011) explored those strategies adopted by policy entrepreneurs for water transition measurements in fifteen countries. They found when facing with policies requiring high degree of stakeholders’ cooperation, policy entrepreneurs have their strength in political coalition and idea diffusion. Botterill (2013) discussed the bottom-up drought policy proposed by policy entrepreneurs in Australia National Drought Management Center and he pointed out 18.

(19) policy entrepreneurs are critical roles in softening-up process with rising opportunity window and political support. Crow (2010) explored the water right policy in Colorado; he identified experts and elites rather than citizens themselves have unique opportunities to influence policy change and overcome political barrier by their expertise. In addition, policy entrepreneurs really can shape influential force. In China, Zhu (2008) found policy actors outside of the government that are powerful enough to influence the legitimacy of policies. On the flip side, once policy entrepreneurs who are supported by citizens might be suspect of power abusing (King&Robert, 1992). However, those researchers still recognized policy entrepreneurs are important actors for social learning and public sector reforms (King&Robert, 1992). Governments also expect policy entrepreneurship can improve the quality of democracy (Baiocchi, 2005; Genro, 1995). Table 4 Literature on policy entrepreneurs facilitating 政治大citizens’ participation No Topic Author Relevant research findings. 15 countries. er. sit. y. ‧. Policy entrepreneurs are critical v i n Ch role in softening-up process with engchi U Botteril rising opportunity window and political support.. al. n. 4. Are policy entrepreneurs really decisive in achieving policy change? Drought policy in the USA and Australia Policy entrepreneurs, issue experts, and water rights policy change in Colorado Strategy of Chinese policy entrepreneurs in the third sector: challenges of ‘‘technical infeasibility’’. io. 3. Huitema, Lebel Meijerink. Nat. 2. The strategies of policy entrepreneurs in water transitions around the world. When facing with policies requiring high degree of stakeholders’ cooperation, policy entrepreneurs has their strength in political coalition and idea diffusion.. Country. 學. 1. ‧ 國. 立. Crow. Zhu. Experts and elites rather than citizens themselves have unique opportunities to influence policy change. Policy actors outside of the government that are powerful enough to influence the legitimacy of policies.. Source: Adapted from (Botteril, 2013; Crow, 2010; Huitema, Lebel 2008). 19. U.S and Australia. U.S.. China. Meijerink, 2011; Zhu,.

(20) 2.1.3 Policy entrepreneurs for networking governance Policy entrepreneurs are taken as critical roles in networking governance; relevant areas consist of highway establishment (Lu, 2009), city development (Wang & Hsung, 2012), technology research with high ethical concerns (Mintrom, 2013), and water management (Brouwer & Biermann, 2011). Network management in policy formation mainly aims at facilitating consensus among diverse networks (Kickert& Koppenjan, 1997; Koppeanjan& Klijn, 2004). Policy entrepreneurs not only promote the quality of consensus and communication; they also work as policy agents who integrate perspectives, needs, expertise and resources among governments, citizens, and interest groups. And table 5 demonstrates, Brouwer & Biermann (2011) indicated that policy entrepreneurs master three linking strategies: selective activation and exclusion, issue linking, and game linking to achieve networking governance. Especially, Asian policy entrepreneurs have 治 the area of networks governance. That 政dominated. 大. dominance can be attributed to conventional culture in Chinese society; most of conflicts in 立. ‧ 國. 學. policy formation tend to be solved by relationship rather than by formal mechanisms of. reconciliation (Wang & Hsung, 2012). In Taiwan, Lu (2009) founded that in the complex of. ‧. highway construction, policy entrepreneurs play as flexible communicators among. sit. y. Nat. stakeholders, bureaucracies, and business communities. Further, he identified the decision not. er. io. only relies on the authorities, but also depends on the perspectives of public media, experts on. n. environment protection, and residents. verify their strategies to a Policy entrepreneurs should v. l C ni U h influence those communities and make impacts e n gtocalert h i these authorities. Also, Wang &. Hsung (2012) researched the brokerage role taken by policy entrepreneurs in Taichung city’s development, they found local politicians, local elites and construction companies are all effective agencies for resource exchanging among diverse networks. Heise (2013) also contends that policy entrepreneurs utilized strategies of networking on policy legislation of school choice.. 20.

(21) Table 5 Policy entrepreneurs for networking governance No. Topic Author Relevant research findings Towards adaptive management: examining the strategies of policy entrepreneurs in Dutch water management. 1. 2. 2. Wang &Hsung. 政治 Heise. Local politicians, local elites and construction companies are all effective agencies for resource exchanging among diverse 大 networks.. Dutch. Taiwan. Taiwan. Policy entrepreneurs utilized strategies of networking on policy legislation of school choice.. U.S.. ‧. ‧ 國. 3. Lu. Policy entrepreneurs master three linking strategies: selective activation, issue linking, and game linking to achieve networking governance. Policy entrepreneurs play as flexible communicators among stakeholders, bureaucracies, and business communities.. 學. Agenda setting and alternative choices of Su-Hwa highway decision-making: A multiple streams perspective Using network analysis for researching brokerage roles in policy process: the case of Taichung city’s development domain before and after the lifting of martial law 立 Law and policy entrepreneurs: empirical evidence on the expansion of school choice policy. Brouwer and Biermann. Country. y. sit. er. io. 2012). Nat. Source: Adapted from (Brouwer & Biermann, 2011; Heise, 2013; Lu, 2009; Wang & Hsung,. al. n. iv. n Ch 2.1.4 Research gap of policy entrepreneurs e n h iinUAsia. gc. Though policy entrepreneurs have been detected in previous dimensions, several. research gaps haven’t been fulfilled yet. The first research gap worthy of notice is insufficient proposition about Asian policy entrepreneurs. Table 6 illustrates extant literature on policy entrepreneurs contextualized in Asia from 1997 to 2015, there are only four articles. Two of them discussed policy entrepreneurs for urban management in China while the rest focuses on policy entrepreneurs’ intermediation for city development in Taiwan (Hammond, 2013;Lu, 2009; Wang & Hsung, 2012; Zhu, 2008). Secondly, as to the role of policy entrepreneurs, 75% of them focus on conventional policy entrepreneurs inside the governments rather than on those with diverse origins. Moreover, as to contribution of theory, except Zhu (2008) proposed a new concept of anti-feasibility, the rest follows conventional structure of multiple streams framework. Limited literature aforementioned that reflects the concept of policy entrepreneurs just newly emerges in Asia, but also reveals how to magnify this role in policy formulation still lacks guidelines for Asian governments and potential policy entrepreneurs. 21.

(22) Table 6 Literature of Asian policy entrepreneur No.. 1. Topic Strategy of Chinese policy entrepreneurs in the third sector: challenges of ‘‘Technical Infeasibility’’. Author. Case of research. Research topics Policy change led by policy entrepreneurs in an authoritative regime. Chinese urban vagrants. Zhu. Identity of Country policy entrepreneurs. Scholars. China. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. The role of Policy Solution for policy entrepreneurship in urban entrepreneurs China 2 Hammond Public officers China’s response poverty taken by to urban poverty public officers 治 in China 政大 Agenda setting and Agenda 立 alternative choices setting and of Su-Hwa alternative Public officers Construction Taiwan 3 highway Lu choices and local of high ways decision-making: organized by politicians A multiple streams policy perspective entrepreneurs Using network al v analysis for ni Ch U Identifying engchi researching policy Brokerage roles in City entrepreneurs’ Public officers policy process: the Wang development Taiwan 4 characteristics and local case of Taichung &Hsung after martial as brokers in politicians city’s development laws policy domain before and processes. after the lifting of martial law Source: Adapted from (Hammond, 2013; Lu, 2009; Wang & Hsung, 2012; Zhu, 2008). n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. In comparison to research on Asian policy entrepreneurs, literature in Western countries is relatively abundant in amount of paper, research dimensions, and origins of policy entrepreneurs. From 1997 to 2015, there’re 10 pieces of research paper on policy entrepreneurs. Those researchers explored policy entrepreneurs in various countries, including the United States. (Botterill, 2013; Crow, 2011; Heise, 2012; Mintrom, 1997), Australia 22.

(23) (Mintrom, 2013), Brazil (Wampler, 2007), the United Kingdom (Mintrom, 2009), and Dutch (Huitema, Lebel. Meijerink, 2011). Moreover, these dimensions of research are quite. diverse. First, eighty percent of these articles center on policy entrepreneurs who originated from non-government sector, such as foundations, universities and political parties. Various dimensions of policy entrepreneurs are detected as well, inclusive of policy entrepreneurs’ strategies, identities, influence, ways of idea diffusion, and political coalition. Most important of all, when these papers are put together, those research findings almost depict a model, which elaborates how policy entrepreneurs go through various policy processes and propose their agenda in Western context. These propositions are of benefit to potential policy entrepreneurs in these countries. When bottom-up policy formation can be easily accepted by Western culture of decentralization, policy entrepreneurs may bring more impact confronting the culture of East. 治 researchers identified that though the Asia, who used to centralized governance.政 As previous 大. expansion of democracy also provides 立citizens with opportunities of policy formation. ‧ 國. 學. (Avritzer, 2002; Grindle, 2000; Heller, 2000; Shah, 2007), policy entrepreneurs have chance to stimulate quality of public policies and trigger democracy of policy formulation. Thus, not. ‧. only contributing a piece of research finding in Asian policy entrepreneurs, this dissertation is. sit. y. Nat. designated to clarify East Asian model by elaborating how a policy entrepreneurs go through. n. al. er. io. multiple policy process contextualized in Asia.. Ch. n engchi U. 23. iv.

(24) Table 7 Literature on policy entrepreneurs in Western countries Research No. Topic Author Case of research topic. 治政大 Water management. Australia. Dutch. 學. ‧. Policy entrepreneurs’ U.S and roles as Australia descriptors or decisive agents. y. Botterill. al. Drought policies. n. 6. Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. Huitema, Lebel立 Meijerink. io. 5. Policy innovation in knowledge economy. Mintrom. Nat. 4. Motivations, practices and narratives of policy entrepreneurs Policy entrepreneurs’ action in subnational reports. Brazil. Crow. Mintrom. sit. 3. Policy incentives for diverse policy actors. er. 2. Wampler. Participatory budgeting from international agencies. ‧ 國. 1. Following the footsteps of policy entrepreneurs: policy advocates and pro forma adopters Policy entrepreneurship , creative teamwork and policy change The strategies of policy entrepreneurs in Dutch water management Are policy entrepreneurs really decisive in achieving policy change? Drought policy in the USA and Australia Policy entrepreneurs, issue experts, and water rights policy change in Colorado. Country. Ch. n engchi U. iv. Water right. Education policy. 24. The role of policy entrepreneurs, policy changes and decision Diffusion of innovation by policy entrepreneurs. U.S.. U.S..

(25) No.. Topic. Author. Research topic. Case of research. Country. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Law and policy entrepreneurs: Policy empirical entrepreneurs’ 7 evidence on the Heise School choice strategies on U.S. expansion of policy school choice legislation policy Policy entrepreneurs Policy change and and agenda controversial with moral Policy with moral Italy and 8 science: Mintrom issues issues UK governing proposed by human policy embryonic stem 政治大 entrepreneurs cell research 立 Policy Diffusion entrepreneurs strategies of 10 and the Mintrom Education policy U.S. policy Diffusion of entrepreneurs innovation Policy entrepreneurship Mintrom Theory testing Roles of policy 11 a v entrepreneurs U.S. and policy & Norman i l C and meta-research hengchi Un change Source: Adapted from (Botterill, 2013; Crow, 2010; Huitema, Lebel Meijerink , 2011; Heise, 2012; Hammond, 2013; Mintrom, 1997; Mintrom& Norman, 2009; Mintrom, 2013; Wampler, 2007). n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Another research gap requires fulfilling is the insufficiency of education policy research. From 1997 to 2015, there’re only two pieces of research paper on education policy. Both of them focus on school choice, a school option for voluntary education, contextualized in America. Mintrom (1997) analyzed the relationship between policy entrepreneurs and diffusion of innovation while Heise (2012) explored how policy entrepreneurs facilitated policy legitimation. However, the complex of education policy formulation contains at least characteristics identified in the beginning of this section, inclusive of competition of innovation, networking governance, and citizens’ participation. In other words, education policy formulation requires participation of policy entrepreneurs as well; limited literature 25.

(26) may undermine the possibility of emergence of policy entrepreneurship in this field. That is another gap this dissertation aims at fulfilling. By analyzing how various policy entrepreneurs propose policy agenda of higher education and how they interact with these stakeholders, our research findings pave a roadmap for Asian policy entrepreneurship.. 2.2.0 Theoretical concept and traits of policy entrepreneurs The theoretical concept of policy entrepreneurs originates from multiple streams framework. Kingdon (1995) offers a dynamic set of policy processes in his “multiple streams framework”. He contends that policymaking contains dynamic movements from problem, solution/policy and politics processes. These processes operate in a parallel manner, rather than a sequential pattern. This framework premises that a government is an organized anarchy with fluid participation, problematic preferences, and unclear technology (Cohen, 1972; Kingdon, 1995; Zahariadis, 2007). In terms of public policy research, these assumptions make a step from conventional stage theory, which assumes 治 policy decisions originate from a series. 政. 大. of liner stages. To policy makers, the立latter one hardly corresponds to the reality of policy. ‧ 國. 學. formulation (Lu, 2009).. ‧. The literature has mentioned various traits of successful policy entrepreneurship (Cobb &. sit. y. Nat. Elder, 1983; Kingdon, 1995; McLendon, 2003). These traits include displaying social acuity,. er. io. making good use of policy networks and understanding the ideas, motives, and concerns of. n. others in local policy contexts (Mintrom entrepreneurs also build a & Norman, 2009). Policy v. ni. l. Cwell h e nto effectively and guide teams or political coalitions as c h i U promote change of policy. g. (Mintrom & Norman, 2009) and within this, they lead by example. The role of policy. entrepreneurs contextualized in problem, solution/policy and politics streams is depicted theoretically as follows and figure 1 illustrates the relationship. 1.. Policy entrepreneurs as interpreters in a problem stream A problem stream consists of various issues from governments and citizens competing for attention. Once an issue is recognized as more important than the rest among decision makers, it is placed on the official agenda in priority. A policy entrepreneur is a critical interpreter who translates a neutral issue into a problem involving most stakeholders’ benefit. Via their sensitivity of the economic, societal and cultural environment, policy entrepreneurs propose public issues to draw public attention (Mintrom, 1997). In order to promote their problem preferences, policy entrepreneurs may develop the evaluation of previous programs as feedbacks translated into negative or positive response based on 26.

(27) diverse goals (Kingdon, 1995). Policy entrepreneurs utilize focusing events for those events lead people’s perception to specific dimensions of problems (Birkland, 1997; Jones, 1994; Zahariadis, 2007). The role of policy entrepreneur in a problem stream can be summarized by Kingdon’s note, “Getting people to see new problems, or to see old problems in one way rather than another, is a major conceptual and political accomplishment”(Kingdon, 1995). 2.. Policy entrepreneurs as brokers in a politics stream In a politics stream, policy actors fighting for their agendas should take following elements into considerations: national mood, interest groups, and party ideology (Kingdon, 1995). National mood means the consensus among the public in a given country (Zahariadis, 2007). Party ideology represents the political impact resulting from administrative or political turnover. As to interest groups, the concept indicates reaction and perspectives from communities involving 政治in the specific policy agenda proposed by. 大. policy entrepreneurs. When a policy 立 agenda corresponds to the national mood, pursuit of. ‧ 國. 學. interest groups, or party ideologies, this agenda has a greater chance to be recognized by stakeholders. In a politics stream, policy entrepreneurs work as brokers. They make good. ‧. use of policy networks; policy entrepreneurs understand the ideas, motives and concerns. sit. y. Nat. of others in local policy context and respond them effectively (Mintrom & Norman,. er. io. 2009). In parallel, Wang & Sung (2013) pointed out, in the Chinese society, the frequent. n. a l system facilitatesi the v emergence of policy communication through the informal. n. C. h e n g c nowadays entrepreneurs, who act as brokers. Especially, h i U public policies rely on. networking governance; that shines the importance of policy entrepreneurs as an intermediate broker. 3.. Policy entrepreneurs as practical team leaders in a policy stream A policy stream involves various solutions from policy proposers competing to win acceptance in political network. Value acceptability and technology feasibility are critical indexes to gain stakeholders’ supports in this stream. Technology feasibility means a proposal is equipped with the feasibility of implementation (Kingdon, 1995; Zhu, 2008). Value acceptability is determined by the participants’ view on value promoted by this proposal (Kingdon, 1995). In order to draft solutions with feasibility and acceptability, policy entrepreneurs operate within a tight-knit team composed of. 27.

(28) members with diverse knowledge and skills, and that team facilitates policy entrepreneurs to promote change of policy (Mintrom & Norman, 2009). And they work as practical team leaders to propose their projects. Policy entrepreneurs as interpreters in a problem stream • •. Feedbacks Focusing events. Policy entrepreneurs as brokers in a politics stream • • •. National mood Interest groups Party ideology. Policy entrepreneurs as practical team leaders in a policy stream. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. Value acceptability Technology feasibility. 政治大學. • •. Policy window. Figure 1 Theoretical concepts and traits of policy entrepreneurs. 2.2.1 Theoretical gap of policya lentrepreneurs. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Source: Adapted from Zahariadis, 2007. n. v ni U e nstill In terms of theory development, there’re gaps. First, multiple streams hi g cresearch. Ch. framework didn’t identify the background of policy entrepreneurs; in reality, researchers and practitioners expect to figure out if expertise, political power or citizenship are influential to the action of policy entrepreneurs. Mintrom (2013) explored the knowledge economy in Australia and specified the policy entrepreneurs should demonstrate their capability in making compelling arguments based on solid base for changing the status quo. Therefore, with the prevailing wave of knowledge economy, policy entrepreneurs with the expertise are capable of conducting policy change. Moreover, Crow (2010) researched the water right policy in Colorado and indicated experts rather than citizens demonstrated most influence. Besides policy entrepreneurs from experts and citizens, Wampler (2007) discussed policy entrepreneurs from the authorities in his research on the policy of participatory budgeting proposed by international agencies. Wamper 28.

(29) (2007) categorized the role from the authorities into three kinds of actors, policy entrepreneurs, policy advocates and pro forma adopters. Policy advocate are the politician or bureaucrat who promoted successful ideas from other region while pro forma adopters implement these ideas by the top-down order. In conclusion, policy entrepreneurs who own the largest political benefit and take the most enormous risk will contribute the most among these three roles. Thus, when more and more policy entrepreneurs join policy formation in higher education, identifying the suitable background of policy entrepreneurs becomes an urgent research issue. However, from 1995 to 2015, there is limited literature on this part. In this study, those cases from policy entrepreneurs inside and outside governments facilitate the author to explore diverse backgrounds of policy entrepreneurs. Moreover, policy entrepreneurs are depicted as critical roles coupling streams of politics, policy and problem together for opportunity of policy window. That is still vague description. 治 functions of policy entrepreneurs. to practitioners. Several researchers care about 政 practical 大. Are they decisive to policy change? 立 Or policy entrepreneurs are just brokers? In the research. ‧ 國. 學. finding from the drought policy in the United States. and Australia, Botterill (2013) concluded that policy entrepreneurs’ action still requires decisive political action at high level. However,. ‧. from 1995 to 2015, relevant literature is still limited. Through practical cases in this study,. sit. er. io. contribution of this dissertation.. y. Nat. policy entrepreneurs’ roles and functions will be specified, and that the other academic. n. al. n Ch 2.3.0 Policy context for policy entrepreneurs i U e. iv. ngch. As Mintrom (2013) indicated policy entrepreneurs master negotiating at specific. operating context. In other word, the operating context determines policy entrepreneurs’ success. In terms of higher education policy, policy entrepreneurs face implicit and explicit contexts influential to higher education policy formation.. 2.3.1 Pattern of interaction between governments and universities In terms of policy formation, the interaction between governments and universities is dominantly interpreted by principal-agency theory (Kivisto, 2007). According to this theory, due to complexity of academia, limited capacity and insufficient information, governments tend to delegate specific tasks to universities by implicit or explicit contracts (Lambert, 2001; Leifner, 2003). Those tasks consist of fostering talents, conducting research, and contributing to social service. Higher education policies, such as competitive grant based on academic 29.

(30) performance, funding in accordance with students’ enrollment and university evaluation, are formulated by the contractual rationale aforementioned. However, even these policy makers set up their tasks as detailed contracts, they still face following risks, such as information asymmetries, goal conflicts, adverse selection and moral hazard (Holtta, 2008; Jongbloed & Vossensteyn, 2001; Kivisto, 2007; Smart, 2001). In order to prevent public interest from being diminished by those risks aforementioned, governments devise various monitoring mechanisms and incentives to secure expected performance from universities (Kivisto, 2007; Saam, 2007). In additional to the contractual interaction, monitoring mechanisms and incentives constitutes specific devices in higher education policies, such as education quality assurance. Nevertheless, the conventional assumption of higher education policy formation has been undermined. Single-principal-single-agent政 pattern治 has been taken as conventional pattern of. 大. interaction among universities and governments in Asia. Extant literature indicated that 立. ‧ 國. 學. multiple-principal-single-agent pattern explains the government-university relation more completely than single-principal-single-agent one does (Kivisto, 2007). With increasing. ‧. complexity of higher education, legislators, faculties’ unions, university associations and. sit. y. Nat. industries collaborating with universities all become significant principals to higher education. er. io. institutions nowadays. These principals set up implicit or explicit contracts with higher. n. education institutions by a variety ofaways as well. Legislators i v passed regulations on l. n. C. h e n gFaculties’ universities’ operation to assure public interests. c h i U unions negotiate with universities on the welfare of staff; corporations donating to universities expect to assure universities’ proper conduct. Even in the governmental system, various actors often share the power as a principal from a government. In brief, the policy environment for policy entrepreneurs no longer suits single-principal-single-agent pattern, they are situated in a multiple-principal-single-agent situation nowadays. When it comes to multiple-principals-single-agent pattern, the policy agenda become an arena in which diverse principals compete with each other. Therefore, the assumption from principal-agency theory should be redefined. In other words, the conventional policy formation of higher education has transformed. In terms of policy formation, the interaction between governments and universities nowadays represents following traits. 30.

(31) 1.. Difficulties of specifying details of contracts The tasks from diverse principals complicate the process of settling the contract between universities and governments. Due to the complexity of higher education, various tasks from legislators, faculties’ unions and industries collaborating with universities make it tough for governments to specify their requirements of higher education policies. During these years, several grant policies from East Asian government encountered the situation aforementioned. Since 2004, the government in Japan and that in Korea only set up guidelines of higher education development and universities can develop their own mid-term plan based on these general directions. Governments in Taiwan also allow universities to provide their own indexes of accountability rather than abiding by those set by the MOE. So the effect of contractual pattern between universities and governments has diminished.. 2.. 治selection, and moral hazard Suspect on conflict of interest, 政 adverse 大. When universities work for 立diverse principals who also represent various. ‧ 國. 學. stakeholders of higher education at the same time, the theoretical assumption about shrinking and conflict of interest may not be severe or even happen. Meanwhile,. ‧. asymmetry of information between governments and universities are diminished.. sit. y. Nat. When the global competition of higher education gets intensive, short-term,. er. io. transparent information of accountability and operation are easily accessed via. n. a l themselves in time. Potential public media or universities negative behaviors from iv. n. C. h eeasily asymmetry of information will be hi U n g cdetected.. As Kivisto (2007) questioned, “Should a university accept all the goals of the government without questioning their effects on freedom? Or, what happen if universities understand better than the government which higher education goals the government should be promoting?” When governments face the multiple-principals-single-agent situation nowadays, policy entrepreneurship may be a potential solution for them to replace conventional contractual relationship with universities. Policy entrepreneurs may solve the dilemma which governments and universities are challenged by the multiple-principals-single-agent situation. First, as an agency delegated by various principals, policy entrepreneurs from universities have the capability of integrating diverse principals’ needs; those principals to universities highly overlap with stakeholders of 31.

(32) higher education policy nowadays, such as students, parents, and industries requiring academic service, governments, and so on. Thus, universities have the strength to understand diverse principals’ needs on the basis of their unique profession and intermediary roles. To governments, policy entrepreneurs from universities facilitate them to meet the stakeholders’ demand and conduct the complexity of academic easily. Secondly, when universities face multiple principals, they should pursue their interest of efficiency and effect of limited resource to conduct tasks satisfying most of the principals in parallel. That condition shapes a more advantageous condition to governments. If governments let universities lead the policy agenda in the multiple-principal-single-agent situation, they may have better defined tasks of contract, more support from the stakeholders and more efficiency of resources. Thus, the updated agent-principal theory support this study’s assumptions. And this theory is adopted as analysis tool for cases.. 政治. 大 2.4.0 Policy entrepreneurs in cultural dynamics. 立. Cultural impact is significant to education policy formation, and therefore shapes the. ‧ 國. 學. pattern of policy entrepreneurs in that region (Marginson, 2011; Wu, 2006; Wursten & Jacobs,. ‧. 2014). Culture has played a significant role in the contextual elements for policy. y. Nat. entrepreneurs; as Hofstede (1980) defines culture as “the collective programming of the mind. io. sit. that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others.” To East Asia. n. al. er. and Taiwan, impact from culture derives from the mixture of regional traits, global trends and. iv. Ch local society. Thus, in this study, those dynamics are taken U nas indexes for control variables.. engchi. Detailed description will be elaborated in chapter 3. 1.. Regional dynamics of culture Education systems of China, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore and Taiwan are deeply influenced by Confucian education and culture. Marginson (2011) identified four interrelated features of Confucian system; those features are listed as below and illustrated in figure 2. (1) Strong nation-state hierarchy The authorities in Confucian Zone tend to device their authorities as centralized power. Thus, governments’ intervention is ubiquitous in most policies of higher education, such as governance structure, funding policy and resource allocation.. 32.

(33) (2) The rapid growth of tertiary participation The emphasis of education from Confucian culture leads to the high tertiary participation rate in those countries. Education is interpreted as family responsibility and honor for the family. Thus, in those countries, the public is enthusiastic with studying and with pursuing degrees. (3) One chance national examinations That trait mediates social competition and university hierarchy and focus family commitments to education. Through one chance national examinations, social harmony and hierarchy are core value of Confucian philosophy. Thus, the one chance national examinations facilitate the government control on social sorting. (4) Accelerated public investment More and more countries in this region invest in research universities. In the era of knowledge economy, they expect that investment can stimulate the ranking of universities and improve the quality 政 of治higher education.. 大. 立. ‧ 國. 學. As Margison(2011) contends though those countries aforementioned have diverse political systems, national traditions, and languages, but they share those traits in their. ‧. education system in common. Moreover, Wursten & Jacobs (2014) elaborated these. sit. y. Nat. cultural dynamics play roles as a “black box” in the policy process and those implicit. n. al. er. io. cultural values are critical in social and education policies.. Ch. n engchi U. iv. One chance national examinations. The rapid growth of tertiary participation. Strong nationstate hierarchy. Accelerated public investment Regional dynamics. Figure 2 Regional dynamics of culture Source: Marginson (2011) 33.

(34) Global dynamics of culture The most significant impact of globalization toward countries in Confucian Zone is the new public management reform (Mok, 2006; Marginson, 2011). Critical elements of new public management reform include efficiency drive, downsizing and decentralization, search of excellence and public service orientation (Sporn, 2002). Under the wave of new public management reform, those countries in Confucius Zone chose a quasi-market model with governments’ supervision to transform their higher education system. As Raza (2009) indicates Japan, Korea, Singapore, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia, Lao and Vietnam either transformed universities as independent entities or infused more autonomy into the higher education institutions through policy legalization or administrative arrangements. With delegating autonomy to university via this model, governments in Confucius Zone also strengthen their evaluation on accountability on the other hand. There are increasing policy tools for assessing performance of 政治. 大. higher education institutions, 立 such as quality assurance, audit and accountability. 學. mechanism.. ‧. ‧ 國 io. sit. y. Nat Downsizing and al decentralization. Search of. n. er. 2.. Ch. n engchi U. i vexcellence. Public service orientation. Efficiency drive Global dynamics of culture. Figure 3 Global dynamics of culture Source: Sporn, 2002. 34.