The Rise of ‘Reflexive University Governance' in the Risk Societies: Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States

Socio-economic upheavals after the Lehman Shock, and in European countries, the introduction of austerity measures have financially overshadowed the university sectors cross-nationally.  The purpose of the paper is to identify how uncertainty and insecurity in the post-2008 period have re-shaped university governance relating to risk management. The study examines university governance at the system and institutional levels in Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.

   The paper is both theoretical and empirical driven. The study takes the theoretical approach by utilising two conceptions of ‘peer reflexivity’ and ‘risk’ in the context of university governance. The former refers to the ‘cycle of peer feedback, self-monitoring, self-analysis and action. Higher education institutions are treated as ‘learning organizations’ (Clark 1998; Dill 1999). The latter explores Beck’s (1992) and Giddens’ (1990, 1999) risk society. The study then proposes, a new concept, ‘peer reflexive governance’, which is compared with Foucault’s neo-liberal ‘governmentality’ (1988, 1991) to capture the characteristics of ‘peer reflexive governance’.

   Regarding empirical analysis, the study takes documentation for data collection in order to identify the extent to which the institutions in three country settings are autonomous (not in direct state control modes), making the peer reflexive mechanisms feasible. The collected document includes acts, government White Papers, circulars and other official documents.

   The paper argues that ‘peer reflexive governance’ has become significant in the insecure and uncertain environment in the post-credit crunch period because the universities have become increasingly more self-aware, reflective, and reflexive than ever before. The universities have strengthened their self-monitoring mechanisms in order to respond to uncertainty and risks, shaping them into learning organizations. The practices of ‘peer reflexive governance’, however, differ between Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.     

   The study is significant because few literatures so far connect the conception of ‘risks’ to university governance.