Search

How much is hegemony and how much is self-determination in the higher education systems in Southeast Asia? This paper argues that while the question of centre and periphery is still relevant to the analysis of international university systems, the analytical frameworks from which it has arisen may lose viability in the long term. Southeast Asian states are making use of higher education to act in ways that will contribute to the altering of their peripheral position in the global economic and political system. While changes in Southeast Asian higher education are closely tied to global markets and follow what sometimes appears to be a dependent pattern of adaptations driven by Western developed economies, the paper argues that there is also a significant amount of resistance. As Southeast Asian countries adapt in ways that help embed economic globalisation within their national landscape, the manner in which the adaptation occurs is more selective, open, and democratic than before. Moreover, while global communication with core (centre) university systems has been more open and transparent, the system is closed to direct intervention from the outside, making hegemony a less plausible explanation for the manner in which the system is reacting within the new global environment of financial interdependency.

Suggests that the rise of democracy was the most important development of the 20th century, examining the question of democracy as a universal value by focusing on: India's experience with democracy; democracy and economic development; the functions of democracy; universality of values; and cultural differences in values. Concludes with a discussion of where the debate belongs. (SM)

Summary: Effective state–business relations are a set of highly institutionalised, responsive and public interactions between the state and the business sector. This paper examines the impact of effective state–business relations on economic growth across Indian states over the period 1985–2006. We propose a measure that captures the various dimensions of effective state–business relations at the sub-national level, and estimate standard growth regressions using dynamic panel data methods. Our results show that effective state–business relations contribute significantly to economic growth and appear to be driven by the intensity of the interactions between the state and the private sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: This paper examines public–private partnerships (PPPs) for development through the example of telecenters in two Indian states. How might a developmental state position itself with respect to civil society under a PPP model of service delivery? We find that each state’s political economy is reflected in its PPP strategy, but that in both states the emerging middle classes rather than the poor benefit most from ongoing telecenter projects. Outsourcing development services to private entities need not “privatize” the state but does alter the way in which citizens “see” the state. Service delivery through telecenters becomes a symbol of government efficiency and responsiveness. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Based on more recent science spending developments in countries such as China, Korea, India and Brazil, there is a growing sense that the world’s scientific deck of cards is in the midst of a major reshuffle. But it is not clear if this reordering is limited to just the top spenders, or, indeed, how these changes have been playing out over the longer term. The new, more comprehensive research and development (R&D) spending estimates presented and discussed here reveal that we are in the midst of a possibly game-changing, albeit partial and perhaps irregular, reshuffle of the global R&D deck. These changes have potentially profound domestic and international economic development implications over the medium to long term. Notably, the fortunes of many of the world’s poorer countries continue to look bleak. Using the evolving structure of past R&D spending to project forward, and absent marked changes in science policies and spending priorities, we foresee a continuing and substantial shift in the geography of R&D towards parts of Asia, along with a continuing large, and in many respects growing, gap between the world’s scientific haves and have-nots. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]