Abstract
This study seeks to explore the incentive factors that serve to instigate university engagement in the third-mission agenda based on evidence drawn from the Russian system of higher education. We pay special attention to how the split of natural and externally induced drivers of the third mission has changed from the Soviet era and up until the immediate modernity. Our analysis has shown that the balance of these two types of incentives never remained flat over the course of history as the Russian university system encountered and had to address different challenges and imperatives at various points in time. We have also found that, while federal initiatives have been adopted by the Russian state that have created a distinctive cohort of universities entrusted with comprehensively contributing to the socio-economic and innovative potential of their host localities as a top-priority task, the third-mission agenda is by no means reduced solely to this very group of institutions, as there are many other universities that are not directly expected to focus on the third mission, but which still favor pursuing proactive and fruitful collaborations with regional stakeholders as arguably representing one of the crucial factors in long-term university sustainability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agasisti, T., Barra, C., & Zotti, R. (2016). Evaluating the efficiency of Italian public universities (2008–2011) in presence of (unobserved) heterogeneity. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 55, 47–58.
Agasisti, T., Egorov, A., Zinchenko, D., & Leshukov, O. (2018). Universities’ efficiency and regional economic short-run growth: Empirical evidence from Russia (No. WP BRP 203/EC/2018). National Research University Higher School of Economics.
Altbach, P. G., & Salmi, J. (Eds.). (2011). The road to academic excellence: The making of world-class research universities. The World Bank.
Belenzon, S., & Schankerman, M. (2013). Spreading the word: Geography, policy, and knowledge spillovers. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(3), 884–903.
Carnoy, M., Froumin, I., Leshukov, O., & Marginson, S. (Eds.). (2018). Higher education in Federal Countries: A comparative study. SAGE Publishing India.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Issues in Higher Education. Elsevier Science Regional Sales, NY.
Conway, C., Humphrey, L., Benneworth, P., Charles, D., & Younger, P. (2009). Characterising modes of university engagement with wider society: A literature review and survey of best practice. [Report].
Cooper, D. (2011). The university in development: Case studies of use-oriented research. HSRC Press.
Douglass, J. A. (2014). Profiling the flagship university model: An exploratory proposal for changing the paradigm from ranking to relevancy. UC Berkeley Research and Occasional Papers Series.
Douglass, J. A. (Ed.). (2016). The new flagship university: Changing the paradigm from global ranking to national relevancy. Springer.
Elliott, D. S., Levin, S. L., & Meisel, J. B. (1988). Measuring the economic impact of institutions of higher education. Research in Higher Education, 28(1), 17–33.
Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(2), 18–29.
Etzkowitz, H. (2004). The evolution of the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), 64–77.
Froumin, I., & Kouzminov, Y. (2018). Common legacy: Evolution of the institutional landscape of soviet higher education. 25 Years of Transformations of Higher Education Systems in Post-Soviet Countries: Reform and Continuity, 45–72.
Froumin, I., & Leshukov, O. (2015). National-Regional Relationships in Federal Higher Education Systems: The case of Russian Federation. Higher education forum: a COE publication, 12, 77–94.
Froumin, I., & Povalko, A. (2014). Top down push for excellence. In How world-class universities affect global higher education (pp. 47–63). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Goldstein, H. A., Maier, G., Luger, M. I. (1995). The university as an instrument for economic and business development: U.S. and European comparisons. In Emerging patterns of social demand and university reform: Through a glass darkly (pp. 105–133). Oxford: Pergamon.
Krčmářová, J. (2011). The third mission of higher education institutions: Conceptual framework and application in the Czech Republic. European Journal of Higher Education, 1(4), 315–331.
Laredo, P. (2007). Revisiting the third mission of universities: Toward a renewed categorization of university activities? Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 441–456.
Marginson, S. (2017). The world-class multiversity: Global commonalities and national characteristics. Frontiers of Education in China, 12(2), 233–260.
Marhl, M., & Pausits, A. (2011). Third mission indicators for new ranking methodologies. Evaluation in Higher Education, 5(1), 43–64.
Molas-Gallart, J., Salter, A., Patel, P., Scott, A., & Duran, X. (2002). Measuring third stream activities. Final report to the Russell Group of Universities. Brighton: SPRU, University of Sussex.
Montesinos, P., Carot, J. M., Martinez, J. M., & Mora, F. (2008). Third mission ranking for world class universities: Beyond teaching and research. Higher Education in Europe, 33(2–3), 259–271.
Pinheiro, R., Benneworth, P., & Jones, G. A. (Eds.). (2012). Universities and regional development: A critical assessment of tensions and contradictions. Routledge.
Pinheiro, R., Langa, P. V., & Pausits, A. (2015). One and two equals three? The third mission of higher education institutions. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(3), 233–249.
Rideout, E. C., & Gray, D. O. (2013). Does entrepreneurship education really work? A review and methodological critique of the empirical literature on the effects of university-based entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 329–351.
Romanenko, K. R., & Lisyutkin, M. A. (2018). University mergers in Russia: Four waves of educational policy. Russian Education & Society, 60(1), 58–73.
Salmi, J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world class universities. The World Bank.
Shane, S. (2002). Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48, 122–137.
Valero, A., & Van Reenen, J. (2019). The economic impact of universities: Evidence from across the globe. Economics of Education Review, 68, 53–67. 35.
Varga, A. (1997). Regional economic effects of university research: A survey. Unpublished manuscript, West Virginia University, Regional Research Institute, Morgantown, WV.
Webster, A., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). Toward a theoretical analysis of academic-industry collaboration. Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia, 47–72.
Wissema, J. G. (2009). Towards the third generation university: Managing the university in transition. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Egorov, A., Leshukov, O. & Froumin, I. “Regional flagship” university model in Russia: searching for the third mission incentives. Tert Educ Manag 26, 77–90 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-019-09043-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-019-09043-y