Abstract
This volume presents contributions that have discussed the role of private actors in ‘statework’ in the area of education, and more specifically in the education policy-making of the European Commission. It shows the benefits of micro- and meso-level analysis to develop our understanding of the topography of privatization in different political arenas. On the whole, the market shape and the dynamics, actors and networks of policy privatization around and within the European Commission’s DG EAC are different from those recently described at the national level in European countries such as the UK and Italy (Ball, 2007; Grimaldi and Serpieri, 2013). The EU policy space is characterized by its own features, and cannot be fully understood without looking at its idiosyncrasies in terms of internal resources, accountability, power struggles, the need for acceptance by societal stakeholders and for legitimization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ball, S.J (2007) Education plc: Understanding private sector participation in public sector education, The Routledge International Handbook Series, 425.
Ball, S. J. (2009) ‘Privatising education, privatising education policy, privatising educational research: Network governance and the “competition state”’ Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 83–99.
Borg, C. and Mayo, P. (2005) ‘The EU Memorandum on lifelong learning. Old wine in new bottles?’ Globalisation, Societies and Education, 3(2), 203–225.
Boston, J. (1994) ‘Purchasing policy advice: The limits to contracting out’ Governance, 7(1), 1–30.
Bouwen, P. (2004) ‘Exchanging access goods for access: A comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union institutions’ European Journal of Political Research, 43, 33 7–369.
Bouwen, P. (2009) “The European Commission”, in D. Coen and J. Richardson (eds), Lobbying the European union: Institutions, Actors, and Issues, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 19–38.
Brine, J. (2006) ‘Lifelong learning and the knowledge economy: Those that know and those that do not — the discourse of the European Union’ British Educational Research Journal, 32(5), 649–665.
Broscheid, A. and Coen, D. (2003) ‘Insider and outsider lobbying of the European commission an informational model of forum politics’ European Union Politics, 4(2), 165–189.
Brown, T. L., Potoski, M. and Van Slyke, D. M. (2006) ‘Managing public service contracts: Aligning values, institutions, and markets’ Public Administration Review, 66(3), 323–331.
Chalmers, A. W. (2013a) ‘Trading information for access: Informational lobbying strategies and interest group access to the European Union’ journal of European Public Policy, 20(1), 39–58.
Chalmers, A. W. (2014) ‘Getting a seat at the table: capital, capture and expert groups in the European Union’ West European Politics, 37(5), pp.976–992.
Coen, D. and Katsaitis, A. (2013) ‘Chameleon pluralism in the EU: An empirical study of the European Commission interest group density and diversity across policy domains’ journal of European Public Policy, 20(8), 1104–1119.
Corbett, A. (2005) Universities and the Europe of knowledge: Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneur ship in European community higher education policy, 1955–2005, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
DG EAC (2014) Open call for tender EAC/22/2013: Specifications, framework contract for evaluation, evaluation-related services and support for impact assessment DG EAC, Brussels.
DG EAC (2010) Open Call for Tender: Specifications, framework contract to provide expertise and support for European cooperation in education and framing DG EAC, Brussels.
Espeland, W. N. and Stevens, M. L. (1998) ‘Commensuration as a social process’ A nnual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 313–343.
European Commission (2011) Framework service contract to provide expertise and support for European cooperation in education and training. Lot 1, 28 July 2011. EAC, Brussels.
European Commission (2014a) Why a transparency register? http://www.ec.europa.eu/transparencyregister/info/about-register/whyTransparency Register, do? locale=en, checked on 10 April 2014.
European Commission (2014b) ‘Financial transparency system’ http://ec.europa.eu/budget/fts/index_en.htm, checked on 10 April 2014.
Giles, C. (2014) ‘Piketty findings undercut by errors’ Financial Times, 23 May 2014.
Ginsburg, M. B. and Gorostiaga, J. M. (2001) ‘Relationships between theorists/researchers and policy makers/practitioners: Rethinking the two-cultures thesis and the possibility of dialogue’ Comparative Education Review, 45(2), 173–196.
Gornitzka, A. and Sverdrup, U. (2011) ‘Access of experts: Information and EU decision-making’ West European Politics, 34(1), 48–70.
Grimaldi, E. and Serpieri, R. (2013) ‘Privatising education policy-making in Italy: New governance and the reculturing of a welfarist education state’ Education Inquiry, 4(3) 443–472.
Herndon, T., Ash, M. and Pollin, R. (2013) ‘Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff’ Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38(2), 257–279.
Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2001) Multi-level governance and European integration, Oxford, Rowman & Littlefield.
Jasanoff, S. (1990) The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kantola, A. and Seeck, H. (2011) ‘Dissemination of management into politics: Michael Porter and the political uses of management consulting’ Management Learning, 42(1), 25–47.
Keating, A. (2013) ‘New modes of governance in Europe: Mapping the multiple actors, institutions, and instruments in a shifting political space’ British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 475–485.
Lauder, H., Brown, P. and Halsey, A. H. (2004) ‘Sociology and political arithmetic: Some principles of a new policy science1’ The British Journal of Sociology, 55(1), 3–22.
Lawn, M. and Grek, S. (2012) Europeanizing education: Governing a new policy space, Oxford: Symposium books.
Mitchell, K. (2006) ‘Neoliberal governmentality in the European Union: Education, training, and technologies of citizenship’ Environment and planning D, 24(3), 389–407.
NAO. (2010) Central government’s use of consultants and interims, National Audit Office, London, The Stationery Office.
Ozga, J., Dahler-Larsen, P., Segerholm, C., and Simola, H. (Eds.) (2011) Fabricating quality in education: Data and goveniance in Europe, Routledge.
Pasias, G. and Roussakis, Y. (2012) ‘“Who marks the bench?” A critical review of the neo-European “paradigm shift” through higher education policies and discourses’ Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies (JCEPS), 10(1), 127–141.
Patton, M. Q. (1988) ‘Politics and evaluation’ Evaluation Practice, 9(1), 89–94.
Piketty T. (2014) Capital in the twenty-first century, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Power, S., and Taylor, C. (2013) ‘Social justice and education in the public and private spheres’ Oxford Review of Education, 39(4), 464–479.
Raudla, R. (2013) ‘Pitfalls of contracting for policy advice: Preparing performance budgeting reform in Estonia’ Governance, 26(4), 605–629.
Reinhart, C. and Rogoff, K. (2010) ‘Growth in time of debt’;American Economic Review, 100(2), 573–578.
Robertson S. L. and Dale, R. (2013) ‘The social justice implications of privatisation in education governance frameworks: A relational account’ Oxford Review of Education, 39(4), 426–445.
Robertson, S. L. and Verger, A. (2012) ‘Governing education through public private partnerships’, in S. Robertson, K. Mundy, A. Verger and F. Menashy (eds), Public private partnerships in education: New actors and modes of governance in a globalizing world, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 21–42.
Room, G. (2005) ‘Policy benchmarking in the European Union: Indicators and ambiguities’ Policy Studies, 26(2), 117–132.
Scriven, M. (1981) The logic of evaluation, Inverness, CA: Edgepress.
Sherman, J. and Walmsley, C. (2013) ‘£800m cost of replacing sacked Whitehall staff The Times’ 15 August 2013. Available from: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3843260.ece [checked on 23–09-2014].
Souto-Otero, M. (2013a) ‘Neo-liberalism and continuing vocational training governance in the UK: An examination of three theoretical accounts’ Educational Review, 65(1), 20–35.
Souto-Otero, M. (2013b) ‘Is “better regulation” possible? Formal and substantive quality in the impact assessments in education and culture of the European Commission’ Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 9(4), 513–529.
Strassheim, H. and Kettunen, P. (2014) ‘When does evidence-based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Configurations, contexts and mechanisms’ Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 10(2), 259–277.
Tuschling, A. and Engemann, C. (2006) ‘From education to lifelong learning: The emerging regime of learning in the European Union’ Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(4), 451–469.
Walkenhorst, H. (2008) ‘Explaining change in EU education policy’ Journal of European Public Policy, 15(4), 567–587.
Williamson, O. (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting, New York: The Free Press.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Manuel Souto-Otero
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Souto-Otero, M. (2015). Conclusions: Who Benefits from EU Policy-Making in Education? The European Commission and the Privatization of Education Policy. In: Souto-Otero, M. (eds) Evaluating European Education Policy-Making. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137287984_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137287984_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-44989-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28798-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Education CollectionEducation (R0)