Search results

Latin America's nonprofit research centers have a major impact on politics and society as well as on academia. Crucial to this impact is the central nonprofit challenge of attracting sufficient, stable income. The centers have done a remarkable job of building a novel and increasingly diversified income profile. This profile ruptures the region's statist tradition as it rests on voluntary giving, markets, an evolving private-public mix, and pluralism.

Conventional development models refer to two sectors, public & for-profit private. Massive growth of nonprofit private activity undermines that picture. Latin American think tanks exemplify a nonprofit privatization that has an enormous impact on development & remolds intersectoral relationships overall. Four major dynamics acount for the spectacular growth of the region's nonprofit think tanks. Three push factors are state repression, state weakness, & public university problems, &, as epitomized by financial supply, a pull factor is also crucial to attract nonprofit growth. To conceptualize these findings, public failure theory is considered. Unhelpful regarding the pull factor, the theory otherwise works reasonably well, especially where there is visible movement from the public to the nonprofit sector. Beyond that, the evidence suggests ways to broaden the theory. Even a broadened formulation cannot fully capture the remarkable diversity & vitality of the growth in Latin America's think tanks. But the key growth factors that blend together to produce particular institutional & national configurations can be identified & analyzed. 53 References. Adapted from the source document.

Se evalúan las experiencias de universidades privadas en América Latina, presentando su crecimiento, sus diferentes metas y los intereses y grupos a que sirven. Este trabajo analiza en qué sentidos, dentro de qué contextos, con qué reservaciones, y para quién, el sector privado ha sido un éxito o no.

Contents: A weakening political class; Expanded and emboldened oppositions.

Authoritarian rule has profoundly transformed Chilean universities. The influence is great on almost all indicators explored but especially on those focusing on political processes and qualitative dimensions. Since 1973 higher education policy - in admissions, appointments, curriculum and finance - has been largely consistent with principal features of bureaucratic authoritarianism. Thus, policy has gone beyond reversing the percieved excesses of Popular Unity rule (1970-1973) to establishing certain unprecedented conditions