In this paper the colonial history of university education in Hong Kong, and recent changes in the governance of university education driven by global management discourses are discussed. With the systemic penetration of global economic rationalism, Hong Kong university education has gone through structural changes that include funding-linked evaluative policies and practices. Market imperatives and institutionally defined notions of research performance based mainly on English-language, overseas journal publications are exerting strong influence on the cultural practices and life styles of academics and stand to significantly change academic and intellectual culture in higher education in Hong Kong. The long-term consequences of these local interpretations and adaptations of global processes will be discussed in terms of their potential impact on academic freedom, the shaping of intellectual space, the intensification of competitive institutional research output, and the risk of privileging certain forms of knowledge production that puts aside local societal needs, indigenous knowledge and epistemologies. The views of experienced Hong Kong academics in the humanities and social sciences, as expressed in in-depth individual interviews, are also discussed. These are then interpreted with reference to Habermas' notion of different kinds of knowledge-constitutive interests (Habermas 1971) and Foucault's notion of the technology of discipline power to uncover the state's implicit transformation and shaping of the social and epistemological bases of academic and intellectual pursuits and the increasing trend of individualization of intellectual communities into isolated, individualistic, competitive knowledge workers (Foucault 1977).
[Copyright of Inter-Asia Cultural Studies is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649370902823397]

This paper critically analyses how the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region has tackled the issue of preschool quality over the past 30 years. Although early childhood education is not part of the publicly funded education system, there is almost universal preschool attendance among three to six year olds. The government regulates, monitors and evaluates early childhood services, and has taken numerous steps to improve the quality of early childhood provision. However, a paradox lurks within government policy. On one hand, the facility-focused and provider-focused regulatory standards for the operation of preschools have been faulted for being too lax; but, on the other hand, policies and incentives have clearly improved the quality of preschool education. These include measures to support the upgrading of serving kindergarten teachers and an emphasis on quality assurance. The implementation of enabling policies is essential to ensure that all children have access to high-quality early education and care.
[Copyright of Early Child Development and Care is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430601078644]