Korkeakoulupolitiikan dynamiikat Suomessa

The study scrutinizes the dynamics of the Finnish higher education political system. Dynamics is understood as the regularity of interaction between actors. By actors is meant the central institutions in the system. The theoretical framework of the study draws on earlier research in political science and higher education political studies. The theoretical model for analysis is built on agenda-setting theories. The theoretical model separates two dimensions of dynamics, namely the political situation and political possibilities. A political situation can be either favourable or contradictory to change. If the institutional framework within the higher education system is not compatible with the external factors of the system, the political situation is contradictory to change. To change the situation into a favourable one, one needs either to change the institutional structure or wait for external factors to change. Then again, the political possibilities can be either settled or politicized. Politicization means that new possibilities for action are found. Settled possibilities refer to routine actions performed according to old practices. The research tasks based on the theoretical model are: 1. To empirically analyse the political situation and the possibilities from the actors point of view. 2. To theoretically construct and empirically test a model for analysis of dynamics in the Finnish higher education politics. The research material consists of 25 thematic interviews with key persons in the higher education political system in 2008. In addition, there are also documents from different actors since the 1980s and statistical data. The material is analysed in four phases. In the first phase the emphasis is on trying to understand the interviewees and actors points of view. In the second phase the different types of research material are related to each other. In the third phase the findings are related to the theoretical model, which is constructed over the course of the analysis. In the fourth phase the interpretation is tested. The research distinguishes three historical periods in the Finnish higher education system and focuses on the last one. This is the era of the complex system beginning in the 1980s 1990s. Based on the interviews, four policy threads are identified and analysed in their historical context. Each of the policy threads represents one of the four possible dynamics identified in the theoretical model. The research policy thread functions according to reform dynamics. A coalition of innovation politics is able to use the politicized possibilities due to the political situation created by the conception of the national innovation system. The regional policy thread is in a gridlock dynamics. The combination of a political system based on provincial representation, a regional higher education institutional framework and outside pressure to streamline the higher education structure created a contradictory political situation. Because of this situation, the politicized possibilities in the so-called "regional development plan" do not have much effect. In the international policy thread, a consensual change dynamics is found. Through changes in the institutional framework, the higher education political system is moulded into a favourable situation. However, the possibilities are settled: a pragmatic national gaze prevailed. A dynamics of friction is found in the governance policy thread. A political situation where political-strategic and budgetary decision-making are separated is not favourable for change. In addition, as governance policy functions according to settled possibilities, the situation seems unchangeable. There are five central findings. First, the dynamics are different depending on the policy thread under scrutiny. Second, the settled possibilities in a policy thread seemed to influence other threads the most. Third, dynamics are much related to changes external to the higher education political system, the changing positions of the actors in different policy threads and the unexpected nature of the dynamics. Fourth, it is fruitful to analyse the dynamics with the theoretical model. Fifth, but only hypothetically and thus left for further research, it seems that the Finnish higher education politics is reactive and weak at politicization.

Ministers as strategic political leaders? : Strategic political steering after NPM reforms in Finland

This study explores strategic political steering after the New Public Management (NPM) reforms, with emphasis on the new role assigned to Government ministers in Finland. In the NPM model, politicians concentrate on broad, principal issues, while agencies have discretion within the limits set by politicians. In Finland, strategic steering was introduced with Management by Results (MBR), but the actual tools for strategic political steering have been the Government Programme, the Government Strategy Portfolio (GSP) and Frame Budgeting. This study addresses these tools as means of strategic steering conducted by the Cabinet and individual ministers within their respective ministries. The time frame of the study includes the two Lipponen Cabinets between 1995 and 2003. Interviews with fourteen ministers as well as with fourteen top officials were conducted. In addition, administrative reform documents and documents related to strategic steering tools were analysed. The empirical conclusions of the study can be summarised as follows: There were few signs of strategic political steering in the Lipponen Cabinets. Although the Government Programmes of both Cabinets introduced strategic thinking, the strategic guidelines set forth at the beginning of the Programme were not linked to the GSP or to Frame Budgeting. The GSP could be characterised as the collected strategic agendas of each ministry, while there was neither the will nor the courage among Cabinet members to prioritise the projects and to make selections. The Cabinet used Frame Budgeting mainly in the sense of spending limits, not in making strategic allocation decisions. As for the GSP at the departmental level, projects were suggested by top officials, and ministers only approved the suggested list. Frame Budgeting at the departmental level proved to be the most interesting strategic steering tool from ministers viewpoint: they actively participated in defining which issues would need extra financing. Because the chances for extra financing were minimal, ministers had an effect only on a marginal share of the budget. At the departmental level, the study shows that strategic plans were considered the domain of officials. As for strategies concerning specific substances, there was variation in the interest shown by the ministers. A few ministers emphasised the importance of strategic work and led strategy processes. In most cases, however, officials led the process while ministers offered comments on the drafts of strategy documents. The results of this study together with experiences reported in other countries and local politics show that political decision-makers have difficulty operating at the strategic level. The conclusion is that politicians do not have sufficient incentive to perform the strategic role implied by the NPM type of reforms. Overall, the empirical results of the study indicate the power of politics over management reforms.

Constructing Ethical Patterns in Times of Globalization : Hans Küng's Global Ethic Project and Beyond

The purpose of this study is to evaluate contemporary philosophical models for global ethics in light of the Catholic theologian Hans Küng s Global Ethic Project (Projekt Weltethos). Küng s project starts with the motto, No survival without world ethos. No global peace without peace between religions. I will use the philosophically multidimensional potential of Projekt Weltethos in terms of its possible philosophical interpretations to evaluate the general discussion of global ethics within political philosophy today. This is important in its own right, but also because through it, opportunities will emerge to articulate Küng s relatively general argument in a way that leaves less room for mutually contradictory concretizations of what global ethics ultimately should be like. The most important question in this study is the problem of religious and ideological exclusivism and its relation to the ethically consistent articulation of global ethics. I will first explore the question of the role of religion as the basis for ethics in general and what Küng may mean by his claim that only the unconditional can oblige unconditionally. I will reconstruct two different overall philosophical interpretations of the relationship between religious faith and human rationality, each having two different sub-divisions: a liberal interpretation amounts to either a Kantian-Scheiermacherian or a Jaspersian view, whereas what I call postliberal interpretation amounts to either an Aristotelian-Thomistic or an Augustinian view. Thereafter, I will further clarify how Küng views the nature of ethics beyond the question of its principal foundation in religious faith: Küng searches for a middle way between consequentialist and non-consequentialist ethics, a way in which the latter dimension has the final stake. I will then set out to concretize further this more or less general notion of the theoretical potential of Projekt Weltethos in terms of certain precise philosophico-political models. I categorize these models according to their liberal or postliberal orientation. The liberal concretization leads me to consider a wide spectrum of post-Kantian and post-Hegelian models from Rawls to Derrida, while the alternative concretization opens up my ultimate argument in favor of a postliberal type of modus vivendi. I will suggest that the only theoretically and practically plausible way to promote global ethics, in itself a major imperative today, is the recognition of a fundamental and necessary contest between mutually exclusive ideologies in the public sphere. On this basis I will proceed to my postliberal proposal, namely, that a constructive and peaceful encountering of exclusive difference as an ethical vantage point for an intercultural and inter-religious peace dialogue is the most acute challenge for global ethics today.

Struggling over subjectivity: A discursive analysis of strategic development in a group

We have seen growing interest in discursive perspectives on strategy. This perspective holds great promise for development of an understanding on how strategy discourse and subjectivity are intertwined. We wish to add to this existing research by outlining a discursive struggle approach to subjectivity. To understand the complex subjectification and empowering/disempowering effects of organizational strategy discourse, this approach focuses on organization-specific discourse mobilizations an various ways of resistance. Drawing on an analysis of the discourses and practices of ‘strategic development’ in an engineering and consulting group we provide an empirical illustration of such struggles over subjectivity. In particular, we report three examples of competing ways of making sense of and giving sense to strategic development, with specific subjectification tendencies. First, we show how corporate management can mobilize and appropriate a specific kind of discourse to attempt to gain control of the organization, which tends to reproduce managerial hegemony, but also trigger discursive and other forms of resistance. Second, we will illustrate how middle managers resist this hegemony by initiating a strategy discourse of their own to create room for manoeuvre in controversial situations. Third, we show how project engineers can distance themselves from managerial-initiated strategy discourses to maintain a viable identity despite all kinds of pressures. Although our examples are case-specific, we believe that similar discursive dynamics also characterize strategizing in other organizations.

Discursive (de)legitimation of a contested Finnish greenfield investment project in Latin America

Despite the central role of legitimacy in corporate social responsibility debate, little is known of subtle meaning-making processes through which social actors attempt to establish or de-establish legitimacy for socially contested corporate undertakings, and through which they, at the same time, struggle to define the proper social role and responsibility of corporations. We investigated these processes in the context of the intense socio-political conflict around the Finnish forest industry company Metsa¨-Botnia’s world-scale pulp mill in Uruguay. A critical discursive analysis of Finnish media texts highlights three types of struggle that characterized the media coverage: legalistic argumentation, truth fights, and political battles. Interestingly, this case illustrates how the corporate representatives — with the help of the national media — tend to frame the issue in legalistic terms, emphasize their expert knowledge in technical and environmental evaluations, and distance themselves from political disputes. We argue that similar tendencies are likely to characterize corporate social responsibility debates more generally.