تمرکززدایی مالی و آموزش عالی از بعد اقتصادی و آموزشی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 مدرس دانشگاه

2 دانشگاه لرستان

چکیده

تقاضای فزاینده برای آموزش عالی از اواسط دهه 1990 باعث گسترش و تنوع سیستم آموزش عالی شده‌است. اقتصاد بازار مستلزم توجه بیشتر بر کیفیت آموزش است که تا حد زیادی با میزان بودجه برای هر دانشجو مرتبط است. آموزش نه تنها بهره‌وری کل عوامل و رشد اقتصادی را تحریک می‌کند، بلکه به مقابله با برخی از چالش‌های اصلی اجتماعی و زیست‌محیطی کمک می‌کند. فراتر از رشد اقتصادی، آموزش، امکان تولید کالاها و خدمات بیشتر و جدید با مصرف کمتر منابع تجدیدناپذیر را فراهم می‌کند و اثرات خارجی منفی مرتبط با تولید را کاهش می‌دهد. ارائه یکنواخت و یک طرفه آموزش تحت نظارت سیستم متمرکز، ممکن است باعث عدم رقابت و استفاده ناکارآمد از منابع عمومی‌شود. در همین راستا، این تحقیق بدنبال بررسی رابطه بین تمرکززدایی مالی و بهبود عملکرد آموزش عالی در استان‌های ایران می‌باشد. جهت بدست آوردن رابطه، از روش برآورد داده‌های پانلی برای دوره زمانی 1385 تا 1398 استفاده شده‌است. نتایج نشان داد که اثر تمرکززدایی درآمدی بر تعداد فارغ التحصیلان دانشگاهی مثبت و ‌‌‌معنی‌دار است. به عبارت دیگر تمرکززدایی درآمدی سبب افزایش تعداد خروجی دانشجویان و افزایش سطح کیفی دانشگاه‌ها می‌شود. همچنین اثر تمرکززدایی درآمدی بر سرانه آموزشی منفی و ‌‌‌معنی‌دار است. بدین معنی که افزایش تمرکززدایی درآمدی سبب کاهش سرانه آموزشی دانشجویان شده، که این امر کاهش کیفیت آموزش در دانشگاه‌ها را در پی دارد، اما رابطه تمرکززدایی هزینه‌ای در هر دو الگوی تخمینی ‌‌‌معنی‌دار نیست.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Financial Decentralization and Higher Education From an Economic and Educational Perspective

نویسندگان [English]

  • Elham Fatholahi 1
  • Mohammad Alizadeh 2
1 lorestan university
2 lorestan university
چکیده [English]

The growing demand for higher education since the mid-1990s has led to the expansion and diversification of the higher education system. The market economy requires more attention to the quality of education, which is largely related to the amount of budget for each student. Education not only stimulates total factor productivity and economic growth, but also helps to tackle some of the major social and environmental challenges. Beyond economic growth, education enables the production of more and new goods and services with less consumption of non-renewable resources and reduces the negative externalities associated with production. The uniform and one-sided provision of education under the supervision of the centralized system may cause lack of competition and inefficient use of public resources. In this regard, this research seeks to examine the relationship between financial decentralization and improving the performance of higher education in the provinces of Iran. To obtain the relationship, the panel data estimation method for the period 2006 to 2019 has been used. The results showed that the effect of income decentralization on the number of university graduates is positive and significant. In other words, income decentralization increases the number of graduated students and increases the quality level of universities. Also, the effect of income decentralization on educational per capita is negative and meaningful. This means that increasing income decentralization has reduced the per capita education of students, which in turn reduces the quality of education in universities. Anyway, the cost-decentralization relationship is not meaningful in both estimated models.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Fiscal Decentralization
  • Per Capita Higher Education
  • Improving Education Performance
  • Panel Data
  • منابع

    • انصاری، عبدالله. (1393). تمرکززدایی از بودجه ریزی در راستای استقرار مدیریت مدرسه محور. رشد مدیریت مدرسه، 101(8)، 22-18.
    • حقیقی، مسعود. (1391). نقش تمرکززدایی و تفویض اختیار در ساختار آموزش و پرورش. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی تحقیقات مدیریت آموزشی، 3(3)، 74-57.
    • خداوردی سامانی، مریم؛ علیزاده، محمد و فطرس، محمد حسن. (1400). بررسی تاثیر تمرکززدایی مالی بر کارایی ارائه خدمات آموزشی در استان‌های ایران طی سال‌های 1397-1385: رهیافت اقتصادسنجی فضایی. فصلنامه مدلسازی اقتصادسنجی، 21(2)، 177-147.
    • خندقی مقصود، امین و دهقانی، مرضیه. (1389). تاملی بر تمرکزگرایی، تمرکززدایی و بازگشت مجدد به تمرکزگرایی و بررسی دلالت‌‌ها ی آن‌ها برای نظام برنامه درسی ایران: منظری جدید. مطالعات تربیتی و روان شناسی، 11(2)، 184-165.
    • سامتی، مرتضی؛ رنانی، محسن و معلمی، مژگان. (1386). تمرکززدایی و منافع تشکیل دولت‌های محلی. مجله تحقیقات اقتصادی، 42(78)، 123-151.
    • کریمی، محمد صادق؛ هویدا، رضا و سیادت، سید علی. )1402(. الگوی پارادایمی تمرکززدایی از نظام آموزش و پرورش ایران. مدیریت و برنامه ریزی در نظام‌های آموزشی، 16)1)،150-125.
    • نقیبی، محمد و تنهایی دیلمقانی، مجید. (1395). اثرات تمرکززدایی مالی بر شاخص توسعه انسانی در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد مالی، 11(38)، 169-149.
    • واعظی، سید کمال و عباسی هرفته، بهزاد. (1396). ارایه الگوی تمرکززدایی در فرایند خط مشی گذاری نظام آموزشی ایران. فصلنامه راهبرد اجتماعی فرهنگی، 7(26)، 85-67.

     

    • Agasisti, T., & Bertoletti, A. (2022). Higher education and economic growth: A longitudinal study of European regions 2000–2017. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences81, 100940.
    • Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.
    • Ahmad, I. (2016). Assessing the effects of fiscal decentralization on the education sector: A cross-country analysis. The Lahore Journal of Economics, 21(2), 53–96.
    • Androniceanu, A., & Ristea, B. (2014). Decision making process in the decentralized educational system. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 37–42.
    • Ansari, A. (2014). decentralization of budgeting in order to establish school-oriented management. School Management Development, 101(8), 18-22. (in Persian).
    • Ayuk, P. T., & Koma, S. B. (2019). Funding, access and quality conundrum in South African higher education. African Journal of Public Affairs, 11 (1), 176-195.
    • Blanco, F., Delgado, F. J., & Presno, M. J. (2020). Fiscal decentralization policies in the EU: a comparative analysis through a club convergence analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice22(3), 226-249.
    • Breusch, T.S., & Pagan, A.R. (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253.
    • Busemeyer, M. (2012). Two decades of decentralization in education governance: Lessons learned and future outlook for local stakeholders. In Presentation delivered at the OECD Conference ‘Effective local governance in education’, in Warsaw.
    • Channa, A., & Faguet, J. P. (2016). Decentralization of health and education in developing countries: a quality-adjusted review of the empirical literature. The World Bank Research Observer, 31(2),199-241.
    • Damirchili, F., & Tajari, M. (2011). Explaining internal factors effective on educational quality improvement based on views of students from Zanjan Azad Universities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 363–366.
    • Grossman, G. , & Helpman, E. (1994). Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 23-42.
    • Haghighi, M. (2012). The role of decentralization and delegation of authority in the structure of education. Educational Management Research, 3(3), 57-74. (in Persian).
    • Heredia-Ortiz, E. (2007). The impact of education decentralization on education output: A crosscountry study. Economics Dissertations Paper, 21, George State University.
    • Hurlin, C., & Mignon, V. (2007). Second Generation Panel Unit Root Tests. Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance, 1-24.
    • Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74.
    • Imana, D. K. (2017). The determinants of public education expenditures: an empirical analysis of changing patterns and growth of public expenditure on education in Kenya. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 7(4), 1-23.
    • Ivanova, N., Kuznetsova, Т., & Khoma, I. (2019). Modern trends in higher education funding. Modern Science, 3, 44-54.
    • Jacqmin, J., & Lefebvre, M. (2021). Fiscal decentralization and the performance of higher education institutions: the case of Europe. Empirica48(3), 743-758.
    • Jeong, D. W., Lee, H. J., & Cho, S. K. (2017). Education decentralization, school resources, and student outcomes in Korea. International Journal of Educational Development, 53, 12–27.
    • Kaewkumkong, A., & Jaiborisudhi, W. (2021). Educational decentralization policies in Thailand and South Korea, A comparative study. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences,42(1), 165–170.
    • Kameshwara, K. K., Sandoval-Hernandez, A., Shields, R., & Dhanda, K. R. (2020). A false promise? Decentralization in education systems across the globe. International Journal of Educational Research104, 101669.
    • Kanti Ghara, T. (2020). Expenditure Pattern in Higher Education in India - AISHE Data Analysis. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 25(5), 42-50.
    • Karimi, M. S., Howida, R., & Siadat, S. A. (2023). Paradigmatic model of decentralization of Iran's education system. Management and Planning in Education Systems, 16 (1), 125-150. (in Persian).
    • Kazungu, K., & Mabula, C. (2013). The Impact of fiscal decentralization on provision of quality education and education spending in Tanzania. African Journal of Economic Review, 1(2), 60-79.
    • Kazungu, K., & Mabula, C. (2013). The impact of fiscal decentralization on provision of quality education and education spending in Tanzania. African Journal of Economic Review1(2), 60-79.
    • Khandaghi Maqsood, A., & Dehghani, M. (2010). Reflection on centralization, decentralization and return to centralization and their implications for the curriculum system of Iran: A new perspective. Educational and Psychological Studies, 11(2), 165-184. (in Persian).
    • Khilji, G., Jogezai, N. , Bibi, N., & Baloch, F. A. (2022). Understanding the effects of educational decentralization through the perspectives of education managers and teachers. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(7), 1206-1220.
    • Khodavardi Samani, M., Alizadeh, M., & Fotros, M. H. (2021). Investigating the impact of financial decentralization on the efficiency of providing educational services in the provinces of Iran during 2006-2018: Spatial econometric approach. Econometric Modeling Quarterly, 21(2), 177 -147. (in Persian).
    • Letelier, S L., & Ormeño C, H. (2018). Education and fiscal decentralization. the case of municipal education in Chile. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space36(8), 1499-1521.
    • Levin, A., Lin, C. F., & Chu, C. S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finitesample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1–24.
    • Mtasigazya, P. (2019). The efficacy of tendering process on outsourced revenue collection in local governments in Tanzania: experience from selected local governments councils: PEOPLE. International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 1712–1729.
    • Muttaqin, T., van Duijn, M., Heyse, L., & Wittek, R. (2016). The impact of decentralization on educational attainment in Indonesia. Decentralization and Governance in Indonesia, 79-103.
    • Naqeibi, M., & Tanhaei Deilmaghani, M. (2016). Effects of financial decentralization on human development index in Iran. Financial Economics, 11(38), 149-169. (in Persian).
    • Narmeen, N., Altaf, S., & Usman, S. (2021). Fiscal decentralization and quality of education in Pakistan. Journal of Contemporary Macroeconomic Issues, 2(1), 58-66.
    • Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. CESifo. Working Paper, 1229, 1-46.
    • Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics22(2), 265-312.
    • Piyumini, T. B., & Wijethunga, A. W. G. C. N. (2020). Effect of investors’ psychology on capital market investment: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Management Matters, 7(1), 1-10.
    • Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A cross-country analysis. Journal of Economic Geography10(5), 619-644.
    • Romer, P. M. (1990). Human capital and growth: Theory and evidence. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 32(1), 251-286.
    • Sameti, M., Renani, M., & Moalemi, M. (2007). Decentralization and the benefits of forming local governments. Journal of Economic Research, 42(78), 123-151. (in Persian).
    • Simatupang, R. R. (2009). Evaluation of decentralization outcomes in Indonesia: Analysis of health and education sectors. Economics Dissertations.
    • Soejoto, A., Fitrayati, D. A., Ghofur, M., & Rachmawati, L. (2017). Does fiscal decentralization affect education inequality?. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship, ISBN: 978-989-758-308-7: 30-35.
    • Sunde, T. (2017). Education expenditure and economic growth in mauritius: An application of the bounds testing approach. European Scientific Journal, 13(22), 1857-7881.
    • Tsinidou, M., Gerogiannis, V., & Fitsilis, P. (2010). Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in higher education: an empirical study. Quality Assurance in Education, 18(3), 227-244.
    • Turhan, S., & Guneyli, A. (2020). Content analysis of scientific studies on decentralization in education and educational administration. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, 29(5), 332.
    • Vaezi, S. K., & Abbasi Herfteh, B. (2017). Presenting the model of decentralization in the policy making process of Iran's educational system. Social and Cultural Strategy, 7(26), 85-67. (in Persian).
    • Weidman, J. C., & DePietro-Jurand, R. (2011). EQUIP2 state-of-the-art knowledge in education.  A Guide to Project Design Based on a Comprehensive Literature and Project Review.
    • West, A., Allmendinger, J., Nikolai, R., & Barham, E. (2010). Decentralisation and educational achievement in Germany and the UK. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy28(3), 450-468.
    • Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69 (6), 709–748.