Examining 'globalisation' and 'convergence': A comparative study of university systems in Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand, 1946--1996

Globalisation has been a subject of intense debate and continual investigation in academic circles for almost 20 years. However, the opinions on what it is and what impact it makes on national systems are still as diverse and divided as ever. This research is an endeavour to contribute further to the understanding of the processes and outcomes of globalisation by undertaking a cross-national historical study of four university systems and four elite universities over an extended period of time. By comparing and juxtaposing the changes in university objectives, provision, funding and regulation between 1946 and 1996, it seeks to establish whether globalisation has reduced national variations and led to convergence in university policies and practices.;This research is structured in three parts. Part I incorporates three chapters: one on the analysis of globalisation and its driving forces; one on the concept of convergence and its manifestations in higher education; and one on the methodology of research. These three chapters together advance an understanding of the mechanisms constituting the convergence hypothesis and its investigation. Part II is comprised of four case studies which provide empirical evidence on the impact of globalisation and the investigation of the hypothesis. Part III provides an integrated analysis of the outcomes as well as a final appraisal of the study itself.;Findings show that global forces do have a strong homogenising tendency causing a high level of convergence across cultures and nations. But convergence is not an inevitable outcome of globalisation. A complicated picture of convergence and divergence is found. It is shown to be possible to have convergence in one aspect of the same policy and divergence in another, as in the examples of female participation and medium of instruction. It is also possible to have convergence among some countries but not others, as in the case of university regulation. The actual result depends on, one, the aspect of policy selected for study; and, two, the dynamic interactions of the following factors: the driving impetus of economic globalisation, the powerful influence of hegemonic states and mighty economic and trade supranational organisations, and the willingness and ability of the nation-states to make the changes. That is to say, the impact of global forces is context-bound. The evidence of both convergence and divergence present at the same time vindicates the complexity and contingent nature of the globalisation process. A more accurate assessment of global effects requires a proper conceptualisation of convergence, the necessary investigation of the global-national-institutional interfaces, and longitudinal comparative studies of different cultures and nations, as illustrated by this study.