Pricing Strategies of Russian State Universities
https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2022.04.032
Abstract
The paper analyzes the pricing strategies of Russian state universities for bachelor and specialist programs. The analysis is carried out by studying the ratio coefficients of the tuition fees and the funding standards for budget students. On the basis of 2016–2019 Monitoring of enrollment quality at Russian universities and Russian Ministry of Science and Higher Education data, it is shown that Russian universities use three types of pricing strategies when attracting a certain contingent of fee-paying students. The first strategy is typical for the leaders of the Russian higher education market: their tuition fee is significantly higher than the funding standards for budget students, while the university’s market niche allows to consistently enroll fee-paying students with a high level of training. The second strategy is used by universities that are able to enroll the required number of fee-paying students with a good level of training on a competitive basis and have advantages at the local and cross-regional levels: tuition fee is approximately at the same level as the funding standards. The third strategy is used by non-selective universities, where the quality of the education allows to enroll fee-paying students only using tuition fees that are below the level of funding standards. The results of the analysis show that competitive universities with a higher level of financial capacity set tuition fees, which significantly exceed the funding standards. At the same time, universities with weak financial capacity and difficulties in fee-paying enrollment are prone to price dumping in violation of regulatory requirements.
Keywords
higher education management,
education policy,
economics of higher education,
higher education funding,
universities’ pricing policy
Supporting agencies: This work was supported by the Program for Basic Research of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE). The author is grateful to the colleagues from HSE Center for Institutional Studies and HSE Institute of Education for their participation in the discussions at various stages of preparing the text. Special thanks to Director of the HSE Center for Institutional Studies M. M. Yudkevich and to HSE supervisor Ya. I. Kuzminov for their valuable comments during the article preparation and for their help in interpreting the analysis results.
About the Author
A. S. Dmitrienko
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksandr S. Dmitrienko – Expert of International Laboratory for Institutional Analysis of Economic Reforms, Center for Institutional Studies
109028, Moscow, Pokrovsky Boulevard, 11
References
1. Clark B. R. The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1986. 315 p. (In Eng.).
2. Johnstone D. B. The Economics and Politics of Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Comparative Perspectives. Economics of Education Review, 2004, vol. 23, nr 4, pp. 403–410. (In Eng.).
3. Marcucci P. N., Johnstone D. B. Tuition Fee Policies in a Comparative Perspective: Theoretical and Political Rationales. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 2007, vol. 29, nr 1, pp. 25–40. (In Eng.).
4. Johnstone D. B., Marcucci P. N. Financing Higher Education Worldwide. Who Pays? Who Should Pay? Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010. (In Eng.).
5. Garritzmann J. L. The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: The Politics of Tuition Fees and Subsidies in OECD Countries, 1945–2015. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. (In Eng.).
6. Marginson S., Rhoades G. Beyond National States, Markets, and Systems of Higher Education: A Glonacal Agency Heuristic. Higher Education, 2002, vol. 43, nr 3, pp. 281–309. (In Eng.).
7. Johnstone D. B. Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Tuition, Financial Assistance, and Accessibility in a Comparative Perspective. Czech Sociological Review, 2003, vol. 39, nr 3, pp. 351–374. (In Eng.).
8. Smolentseva A. Marketisation of Higher Education and Dual-Track Tuition Fee System in Post-Soviet Countries. International Journal of Educational Development, 2020, vol. 78, article 102265. (In Eng.).
9. Johnstone D. B. Cost-Sharing and the CostEffectiveness of Grants and Loan Subsidies to Higher Education. In: P. N. Teixeira, D. B. Johnstone, M. J. Rosa, H. Vossensteyn (Eds.), Cost-Sharing and Accessibility in Higher Education: A Fairer Deal?, Springer, 2006, pp. 51–77. (In Eng.).
10. Hillman N. Differential Tuition Fees: Horses for Courses? Higher Education Policy Institute, 2018. 84 p. (In Eng.).
11. Hüther O., Krücken G. Higher Education in Germany – Recent Developments in an International Perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. 284 p. (In Eng.).
12. Zullo M., Churkina O. A Quasi-Experiment in International Student Mobility: Germany’s Fee ReIntroductions. European Journal of Higher Education, 2021, pp. 1–22. (In Eng.).
13. Huether O., Kruecken G. The Rise and Fall of Student Fees in a Federal Higher Education System: The Case of Germany. In: H. Ertl, C. Dupuy (Eds.), Students, Markets and Social Justice, Higher Education Fee and Students Support Policies in Western Europe and beyond, Oxford, 2014, pp. 85–110. (In Eng.).
14. Kehm B. Tuition Fee Reform in Germany. International Higher Education, 2006, vol. 45, pp. 2–3. (In Eng.).
15. Alberti-Alhtaybat L. von, Abdelrahman N., Al-Htaybat K. The Effect of Different Higher Education Fee Policies on Education: A Comparison between England and Germany. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 2017, vol. 30, nr 2, pp. 189–208. (In Eng.).
16. Brown R., Carasso H. Everything for Sale? The Marketisation of UK Higher Education. London: Routledge, 2013. 235 p. (In Eng.).
17. Hickey R. How and why have Higher Education Tuition Fee Policies Evolved in England since 1997? A Critical Discourse Analysis of Dearing, Browne and Augar. Policy Futures in Education, 2022, pp. 1–22. (In Eng.).
18. Wakeling P., Jefferies K. The Effect of Tuition Fees on Student Mobility : The UK and Ireland as a Natural Experiment. British Educational Research Journal, 2013, vol. 39, nr 3, pp. 491–513. (In Eng.).
19. Andrews M. The Development of English University Tuition Fee Policy from 1960 with Lessons for Today. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 2021, vol. 25, nr 4, pp. 117–126. (In Eng.).
20. Murphy R., Scott-Clayton J., Wyness G. The End of Free College in England : Implications for Enrolments, Equity, and Quality. Economics of Education Review, 2019, vol. 71, pp. 7–22. (In Eng.).
21. Gorbunov A. P. Rossiiskaya vysshaya shkola v usloviyakh rynochnykh reform 1990-kh gg. [Russian Higher Education in the Context of Market Reforms in the 1990s.]. Novyi istoricheskii vestnik [The New Historical Bulletin], 2006, nr 1 (14), pp. 181–207. (In Russ.).
22. Klyachko T. L. Modernizatsiya rossiiskoi sistemy vysshego professional’nogo obrazovaniya [Modernization of the Russian System of Higher Professional Education], Doctor’s thesis, Moscow, 2007, 378 p. (In Russ.).
23. Nefedova A. I. Model’ eksporta rossiiskogo vysshego obrazovaniya [Export Model of Russian Higher Education]. Vserossiiskii ekonomicheskii zhurnal EKO [ECO Journal], 2017, nr 12 (522), pp. 136–148. (In Russ.).
24. Arefiev A. L. Eksport rossiiskogo obrazovaniya: osnovnye pokazateli i tendentsii [Export of Russian Education: Main Trends and Indices]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia], 2010, nr 1, pp. 125–141. (In Russ.).
25. Belyakov S. A., Krasnova G. A. Eksport vysshego obrazovaniya: sostoyanie i perspektivy v Rossii i v mire [Exporting Higher Education: Its State and Prospects in Russia and the World]. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz [University Management: Practice and Analysis], 2016, nr 6 (106), pp. 26–34. (In Russ.).
26. Melikyan A. V. I n st it ut sion al’nye fa k t or y, vliyayushchie na rezul’taty eksportnoi deyatel’nosti rossiiskikh vuzov [Institutional Factors Affecting the Results of Export Activities of Russian Universities]. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz [University Management: Practice and Analysis], 2017, vol. 21, nr 6 (112), pp. 68–80. (In Russ.).
27. What is the Profile of Internationally Mobile Students? In: Education at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, Paris, 2019, pp. 228–244. (In Eng.).
28. Arefiev A. L., Sheregi A. F. Eksport rossiiskikh obrazovatel’nykh uslug [Export of Russian Educational Services], Moscow, Tsentr sotsial’nogo prognozirovaniya, 2019, 533 p. (In Russ.).
29. Klyachko T., Sinel’nikov-Murylev S. O normativakh byudzhetnogo finansirovaniya i regulirovaniya velichiny platy za obuchenie v gosudarstvennykh vuzakh [On the Norms of Budget Financing and Regulation of the Value of Tuition Fees in State Universities]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2012, nr 6, pp. 137–164. (In Russ.).
30. Hansen S. C., Otley D. T., Stede W. A. van der. Practice Developments in Budgeting: An Overview and Research Perspective. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2003, vol. 15, nr 1, pp. 95–116. (In Eng.).
Review
For citations:
Dmitrienko A.S. Pricing Strategies of Russian State Universities. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2022;26(4):84-98. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2022.04.032
Views:
486
Email this article 