The ‘West Review’ argues that the determination of tertiary sector education program offerings should be decentralised by basing funding on student preferences. Research activities should be centrally prioritised with access to training being also dependent on such preferences. These views are questionable. Informational asymmetries imply that student sovereignty is a poor basis for designing programs and allocating research funds. Central prioritising cannot provide the benefits achievable in liberal structures which promote diversity. The Review's endorsement of centralised university management will realise measured cost savings but at the expense of quality.
PavittK. (1993). What do firms learn from basic research? In ForayD.FreemanC. (Eds.), Technology and the wealth of nations. United Kingdom: Pinter Publishers.
9.
Review of Higher Education Financing and Policy (R. West, Chair). (1998). Learning for life: Final report. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
10.
Rose-AckermanS. (Ed.). (1986). The economics of non-profit institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
SpenceM. (1974). Market signalling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
WilligR.D. (1993). Public versus regulated private enterprise. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics. pp. 155–170. Washington: World Bank.
