Abstract
inflexible salary scales, and facilitate the introduction of innovative forms of service delivery. Skeptics argue that the high cost of borrowing for the private sector, as well as high setup and contract monitoring costs, mean that PFIs can be expensive relative to traditional forms of procurement, especially for small projects. Poor specification of capital needs, flawed contract design, and weak monitoring of projects can also expose the government to significant financial and operational risks, thus negating one of the main intended benefits of PFIs. To overcome these, governments must invest considerable resources in developing standardized contracting processes and resources, as well as capacity building of staff.
Highlights
PFIs can play a useful public policy role— in countries where considerable investment is required to provide higher education institutions with 21st-century teaching and research infrastructure
We need to know more about the potential impact of PFIs in higher education
Changes in the Role of Government The commission report has been used as a platform for the Department of Education to strengthen the government's role in judging quality and directing how private accreditation bodies function
Summary
Conclusion PFIs can play a useful public policy role— in countries where considerable investment is required to provide higher education institutions with 21st-century teaching and research infrastructure. Accreditation is one of the few levers allowing the federal government to force change in higher education.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
