Country Competitiveness Relationship with Higher Education Indicators

Santos Lopez-Leyva,Gary Rhoades

doi:10.4067/s0718-27242016000400007

Santos Lopez-Leyva, Gary Rhoades

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-27242016000400007

Copy DOI

Abstract

This paper reports the performance of global competitiveness and higher education competitiveness between two groups of countries. The first group is formed by four Asian countries; the second one by four Latin American countries. Indicators from the World Economic Forum 2007-2015 are compared. The indicators with the nearest proximity were found in the management quality of the universities, where there was only a five-point difference in favor of the Asian group. The indicator with the widest gap came from the quality of math and sciences education where we found a difference of 104 points. This is congruent with the results of PISA 2012, which showed a difference of 152 points in math.

Highlights

This paper reports the competitiveness of the higher education system in two groups of countries
The theoretical framework was built by reviewing the categories of competition and competitiveness, which have been introduced in the economics of education studies, since they are processes with high influence in higher education institutions and for being theoretical dimensions that have been widely discussed from the last quarter of the twentieth century
By analyzing the Global Competitiveness Index data, in particular the pillar number 5, called higher education and training, we found out that from its eight components, Asian countries have achieved the best indicators in two components: quality of the education system and quality of math and science education

Summary

Introduction

This paper reports the competitiveness of the higher education system in two groups of countries. The first group includes four countries that. Gregory and Stuart (2014) classify within the Asian development model because of their development styles. This model states that to achieve fast economic growth, “The government promoted universal education and investment in human capital, such as public health. The high levels of human capital at the start of growth contributed substantially to the rapid economic growth.” The second group is comprised of four Latin American countries that are in transition from stage two to stage three, i.e. they are moving from the stage of intermediate competitiveness to high competitiveness. The theoretical framework was built by reviewing the categories of competition and competitiveness, which have been introduced in the economics of education studies, since they are processes with high influence in higher education institutions and for being theoretical dimensions that have been widely discussed from the last quarter of the twentieth century

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion