This article critically examines how Asian countries have responded to the global economic crisis which started in late 2008, with particular reference to explore what major coping strategies have been adopted by these Asian governments to continue educational development. This comparative study highlights the significant role of the state in support of education, especially when foreign aids for development projects have declined in those developing economies in Asia.
[Copyright of Journal of Education Policy is the property of Routledge . Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.510641]

Under intensified pressures for improving the global competence of university graduates, national governments across different parts of the globe have to on the one hand expand higher education enrolments and on the other hand assure high quality in teaching and research in order to make sure their higher education systems can compete globally. Many Asian states have been in the forefront of this effort to improve national competitiveness by raising their higher education enrolment rate. As state financing and provision alone will not satisfy the growing demands for higher education, governments in Asia adopt more pro-competition policy instruments and increasingly look to the market/private sectors in running higher education. Therefore the private higher education sector has paid for much of the higher education sector expansion, leading to revolutionary changes and imparting a growing 'privateness' to Asian higher education systems. This article sets out in this wider socio-economic context to examine the rise of transnational higher education in three Asian societies: Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia. With particular reference to examining how the growing prominence of privateness in higher education has challenged the conventional education governance models, this article critically examines how these Asian states have reinvented their regulatory regimes to govern the growing complexity and highly contested public-private mix in higher education.
[Copyright of Pacific Review is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09512740801990220]

Globalisation is a central concept in this paper but it is important to note that 'globalisation' is a highly contested term. Strong globalisation theory argues that the global economy is dominated by uncontrollable global forces in which nation states are structurally constrained and therefore the capacity of modern states eventually declines. Unlike strong globalists, other scholars believe even though there may be similar trends and patterns in public policy and public management domain along the line of privatisation, marketisation, commodification and corporatisation, different governments may use the similar strategies to serve their own political purposes. Hence, modern states may tactically make use of the globalisation discourse to justify their own political agendas or legitimise their inaction. The present paper sets out in this wider context to reflect upon globalisation effects on national policy, with particular reference to how the selected East Asian societies such as the four Tigers, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea as well as mainland China have transformed their higher education systems. More specifically, this paper discusses the theme of 'similar trends, diverse agendas' by examining how the selected East Asian governments have reformed their higher education systems to cope with the growing impact of the global tide of marketisation and decentralisation.
[Copyright of Globalisation, Societies & Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1476772032000105519]