Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe corporatization of public services by moving services previously provided in‐house into various types of arms‐length corporate forms of organization is becoming an important trend at multiple levels of government. Although the use of such corporate forms to deliver public services is not a new phenomenon, evidence on the impact of corporatization on public services provision is only slowly emerging. In this symposium, we aim to advance our understanding of the theoretical and practical implications of corporatization through empirical analyses of its dynamics in a range of different settings. In this introductory article, we begin by explaining what is meant by the corporatization of public services and the different forms that it can take, before summarizing the existing evidence on the governance, accountability, and performance of corporatized public services. We then describe the articles included in the symposium and conclude by outlining a future research agenda for studying corporatization.

This essay reviews recent books and articles that examine the politics and economics of the restructuring of public universities in the United States. The author weaves the arguments together to point to several prominent trends: increased corporatization of university governance and increased dependence on the market for resources previously provided by the state, reduction of full-time faculty in favor of instructors and adjuncts, dramatic growth of administrative personnel, and mounting student debt. The history of these developments is explored by examining the roots of the political attacks on the public university.

The purpose of rural development is to improve the harsh conditions of the rural environment, which provide challenging living conditions for its people. The increasing competitiveness of the century have made it necessary for farmers to set up a company to be able to cope with the political and economic bottlenecks, which are more prevalent than ever, to plan, evaluate, effectively market the product of the agricultural producer, to get rid of the intermediaries, to resist against the pressures of big companies and most importantly to institutionalize. Agricultural companies usually have a small land structure and inadequate capital. Small farmers often do not know how to set up and operate a business, not familiar with the laws and regulations and lacked skilled employees. In addition there are too many regulations to comply with procedures tend to change frequently. Therefore, corporatisation levels in agriculture are not at the desired levels. Existing agricultural enterprises are small-scaled to reflect the structural characteristics of the land. They do not have endurance against large companies; also have higher closure rates compared to their larger competitors. These closures are rapidly increasing compared to large companies. Moreover, In addition, the share and profitability ratios of agricultural enterprises from Gross Domestic Product (GDP) are not desirable levels. In order to meet Sustainable Rural Development and the economic and ecological requirements of the century, farmers should be encouraged to engage in private initiatives, as in other sectors, rather than receiving grants, government support and support from non-profit cooperatives. Support programs must be set up to ease incorporation, legal processes should be simplified and investments to R&D should be increased for this purpose. Only in this way some of the barriers to agricultural incorporation can be eliminated. As in other sectors, the company in agriculture can proceed and the rural balance of the city is preserved by ...

In 2003, only two colleges charged more than $40,000 a year for tuition, fees, room, and board. Six years later more than two hundred colleges charged that amount. What happened between 2003 and 2009 was the start of the recession. By driving down endowments and giving tax-starved states a reason to cut back their support for higher education, the recession put new pressure on colleges and universities to raise their price. When our current period of slow economic growth will end is anybody's guess, but even when it does end, colleges and universities will certainly not be rolling back their prices. These days, it is not just the economic climate in which our colleges and universities find themselves that determines what they charge and how they operate; it is their increasing corporatization. If corporatization meant only that colleges and universities were finding ways to be less wasteful, it would be a welcome turn of events. But an altogether different process is going on, one that has saddled us with a higher-education model that is both expensive to run and difficult to reform as a result of its focus on status, its view of students as customers, and its growing reliance on top-down administration. This move toward corporatization is one that the late University of Montreal professor Bill Readings noted sixteen years ago in his study, The University in Ruins, but what has happened in recent years far exceeds the alarm he sounded in the 1990s. Adapted from the source document.

During the last 15 - 20 years reforms inspired by so-called New Public Management have swept the public sector all over the world. This is also the case in the transport sector. One can divide NPM reforms roughly into two groups, reforms regarding internal organisation, and reforms that are interorganisational and regard the organisation of the public service (Klausen and Ståhlberg 1998). This paper deals with interorganisational reforms. Since the mid-1980s what might look like an organisational revolution has taken place in the Danish transport sector. Previously, the Danish state railways (DSB) ran trains as well as the busses and ferries. When the possibilities of building large bridges linking together different parts of Denmark and linking Denmark and Sweden were discussed, they were expected to be state bridges. 88% of the busses in the Greater Copenhagen Area were in-house production by a politically managed company. The sole large airport in Denmark, Copenhagen Airport, was run by Copenhagen Airport Service, which was an administrative unit in the Ministry of Transport. Today, this organisational set-up has been drastically changed. The former state railways has been split into several corporations - some of which have private owners, while others are publicly owned. Two of the large bridges have been built (the third is subject to a decision making process), and the owner of them is a limited company, however the Danish (and the Swedish) State are the only shareholders. Several buss companies nowadays run the busses in the Greater Copenhagen Area and they are all subject to tendering. The Copenhagen Airport today is a limited company quoted on the stock exchange, the state having 33.8% of the shares. Other changes have been seen, but these are probably the most important. In Denmark, the term often used for this process is "corporatization", this differs from privatisation, because the new corporations are not necessarily private, although regulated according to civil law. "Quangos" is an commonly used – and vague - label for these corporations. Quango is an acronym for "quasi non government organisations" (Barker 1982: 4).

In 2003, only two colleges charged more than $40,000 a year for tuition, fees, room, and board. Six years later more than two hundred colleges charged that amount. What happened between 2003 and 2009 was the start of the recession. By driving down endowments and giving tax-starved states a reason to cut back their support for higher education, the recession put new pressure on colleges and universities to raise their price.