Proposal #4: Increasing the Role of the Private Sector in the Provision of Educational Infrastructure
216 A critical need in the Pakistan HE sector is the upgrading of infrastructure, including buildings, equipment, laboratories and hostels. The HEC could consider making greater use of the private sector in the financing, design, construction and operation of public HE infrastructure. Such infrastructure PPPs are an increasingly common form of procurement for large infrastructure projects in the education sector and could be used for all types of infrastructure, including classrooms, laboratories and hostels.
217 The private sector can participate in infrastructure in a variety of ways – financing, design, construction and operation. Different types of infrastructure PPP exhibit varying degrees of private sector risk and responsibility, such as the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) arrangements – also often referred to as Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO) arrangements. Under the most common type of PPP arrangement – BOT – the private sector finances, designs, constructs and operates a public school facility under a contract with the government for a given period (for example, 25-30 years). At the end of that concession period, ownership of the school facility transfers to the government. While arrangements can differ widely, infrastructural PPPs have a number of characteristics in common (see Annex 8).
Proposal # 5: Building Linkages between HEIs and Employers in the Public and Private Sectors
218 A more innovative and knowledge-driven economy must be underpinned by closer linkages and greater collaboration between research institutes, HEIs and industry. The HEC has recognized the need to enhance university-industry linkages and has already taken steps to address the issue. Among the initiatives included in the MTDF are:
-
the launch of a University-Industry Technology Support Program;
-
a requirement that public HEIs and DAIs to establish career centers and develop links with industry;
-
development of university/industry collaborative programs involving a minimum 20 percent matching contribution from industry; and
-
development of National Centers at public universities/DAIs in areas deemed to be priorities for the socio-economic development of the country.
219 The initiatives in the MTDF represent important steps in bridging the academia-industry divide. However, two key problems with the proposals should be addressed. First, it needs to be recognized that a number of factors constrain public institutions’ ability to deliver the tuition, research and other services that are valued by industry and the private sector and that represent the basis for developing sustainable university-industry linkages. These include: (i) bureaucratic and inflexible institutional governance arrangements, which slow down decision-making; (ii) rigid institutional employment arrangements, including the inclusion of public HEIs under PSC pay and employment rules; and (iii) an outdated curriculum, coupled with academic processes that make curriculum change a difficult and time consuming task.
220 It is important, therefore, that these problems be addressed during the development and implementation of the HEC’s university-industry linkages initiatives. For example, in developing National Centers, the HEC should ensure that these organizations are established as private/autonomous research centers or companies attached to public universities. These research centers would operate outside the public service and would have greater staffing, spending and operational flexibility than public HEIs. Such an arrangement would allow for staff sharing and provide a marriage of universities’ research capacity and the flexibility and industry relevance inherent in a private sector organization. Such organizations would be better placed to develop and commercialize basic research.
221 In addition to the establishment of National Centers, the HEC should also facilitate and encourage (perhaps through seed grants) the development of private research centers alongside public and private HEIs. These could be modeled on existing Pakistan examples such as CASE/CARE or examples from other countries such as the United States, Australia and New Zealand. In New Zealand, many universities have set up subsidiary companies to take on roles that are more commercial in nature. This provides those organizations with the flexibility needed to operate in the commercial world.
222 Second, a number of existing HEC policies are directed solely toward public sector HEIs. For example: (i) research grants are available only to researchers at public institutions; (ii) HEC development funding is directed entirely toward public institutions; and (iii) National Centers are expected to be developed only at public HEIs. Yet, as discussed above in the case of tuition subsidies, there is no rationale for differentiating between public and private researchers/HEIs in the allocation of development or research funding. All HEC research funding should be contestable between public and private HEIs/industry research centers and be performance-based.
223 Third, the HEC should address issues of relevance by making greater use of industry in the development of curricula and facilitate the development of industry placement and practical training programs for HE students. Currently, curriculum committees are made up predominantly of academics, although they do include academics from private institutions and industry. Finally, the HEC should work with the PSC to review its competencies and hiring standards to ensure they are up to date and aligned with wider labour market competencies and needs. The size of the public sector and the system of centralized civil service exams in Pakistan means that the PSC’s competencies and hiring standards can have a significant influence on the academic programs delivered by HEIs.
Share with your friends: |