1.1 Research background
The âOutline of Chinaâs Education Reform and Developmentâ issued in July 1993 clearly pointed out that by the end of the 20th century, Chinaâs fiscal education expenditures will account for the important goal of 4% of the gross domestic product (GDP). This index was set by the domestic academic circles with reference to the level of government investment in education in major developed countries. But it was not until 20 years later that the proportion of national fiscal expenditure on education in GDP exceeded 4% for the first time. However, the tardy 4% puts the formulation of Chinaâs public education fiscal policy into a new dilemma. Some domestic scholars begin to focus on the topic of âpost-4% eraâ to discuss the trend of Chinaâs public education fiscal expenditure in the future, as well as the establishment of a long-term guarantee mechanism for education investment (Bao, 2012; Zeng & Long, 2013; Zhang & Lan, 2014; Hu & Tang, 2014). The scale and allocation structure of financial investment in higher education is a very important research topic.
Through reading the existing relative research papers, we find that there are three main problems in the financial investment system of higher education in China: First, the allocation of investment in different âidentityâ universities is unbalanced, and the operating cost of local colleges and universities is far higher than the standard of financial allocation per student. Second, the internal funding structure of colleges and universities has not reached the optimization state, and the lack of quota of teachersâ average in the financial allocation based on the average student comprehensive quota leads to the lack of stable sources for basic scientific research activities of teachers. Third, the university should make beneficial practical exploration and personnel training system reform in accordance with the changes of the demand specification of talents in accordance with the economic and social development under the ânew normalâ in economic development, which needs the support and guarantee of the government financial funds.
1.1.1 Imbalance of investment allocation in colleges and universities with different âidentitiesâ
The â211 Projectâ and â985 Projectâ debate in the media around 2015 reflects the imbalance of government investment in different âidentityâ universities in the era of popular higher education. On August 18, 2015, the meeting of the central leading group for comprehensively deepening reform deliberated and approved the âOverall Plan for Promoting the Construction of World-Class Universities and First-Class Disciplinesâ, including the 211 Project, 985 Project, and âInnovation Platform for Advantageous Disciplinesâ into the construction of world-class universities and first-class disciplines. In January 2017, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Finance, and the National Development and Reform Commission issued âThe Implementation Measures for Promoting the Construction of World-Class Universities and First-Class Disciplines as a Whole (Provisional)â. On September 21, 2017, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Finance, and the National Development and Reform Commission jointly issued the notice on publishing the university lists of world-class universities construction (hereafter WCUC) and world-class discipline construction (hereafter WCDC), officially announcing the list of 140 âdouble first-classâ construction universities, including 42 WCUC universities and 95 WCDC universities. In October 2018, the Riseqi Think Tank published statistics on the annual budget of 42 WCUC universities from 2016 to 2018. More than 60% of the double first-class universities had a budget of more than 5 billion yuan, and Tsinghua University ranked first. The budget of Tsinghua University in 2018 was close to 27 billion yuan. The budget of most colleges and universities increased significantly, especially for Tongji University, Lanzhou University, Ocean University of China, and Yunnan University in 2018 showed a larger increase than the previous year, and the total budget for Tongji University and Yunnan University even doubled, which is related to the local governmentâs support for the double first-class policy (Wang, 2018).
Not only is there a huge difference between the central and local finance in the financial allocation of double first-class and nonâdouble first-class universities, but also the gap between the central and local universities has been widening for a long time. Through sorting the data of higher education funds from 1998 to 2015, Xu (2018) found that compared with the central universities, local universities are seriously insufficient in average funding and average student funding. In 1998, there were 263 central universities and 759 local universities. The average funding of central universities was 4.28 times that of local universities. By 2015, there were only 111 central colleges and universities, while the number of local colleges and universities had increased to 2734. However, the average funding of central colleges and universities had expanded to 10.52 times that of local colleges and universities. From the perspective of average student funding, before 2011, the gap between central universities and local universities had been expanding, from 1.75 times to 2.5 times. The data of 2015 shows that the average student funding of central universities is 51,600 yuan, while that of local universities is only 24,500 yuan, and the gap is still very obvious.
Under the situation that the average funding level of local colleges and universities is at a low level, the budget expenditure of local colleges and universities is constantly improving, and the financial allocation is far lower than the actual operating cost of colleges and universities, which has become an obstacle for ordinary colleges and universities to improve the quality of higher education.1 In fact, some researchers have noticed the operating cost of local colleges and universities and pointed out that the operating cost of local colleges and universities far exceeds the average student funding level from the finance. For example, Fanâs (2015) analysis shows that the income and expenditure of education funds in local colleges and universities are becoming increasingly unbalanced, and many colleges and universities even try to seek loans from banks to alleviate the problem of funds shortage. Li (2016) pointed out that the original limited financial support cannot be fully realized. About 27.38% of local universities said that the government funding is difficult to fully meet, which further improves the difficulty of raising education funds. On the other hand, based on the principle of educational equity, colleges and universities also need to ensure that poverty does not keep students from low-income families out of school. The communique of the 2009 World Conference on Higher Education put forward that
while expanding the enrollment opportunities of higher education, higher education must pursue the three goals of fairness, appropriateness and quality at the same time. Equity is not just a simple issue of access â it also means that to ensure the smooth participation and completion of the goals of their studies, while ensuring the treatment of students, it is necessary to provide appropriate financial assistance to poor and marginalized groups.
(Xiong, 2009)
According to the research of Jin and Lou (2019), the average tuition fees of Zhejiang University in 2017 reached 27.8% of the disposable income of rural residents and 18.32% of the disposable income of urban residents. It can be seen that the tuition fees of local colleges and universities still exceed the affordability of some rural families. In addition, the study also points out that the tuition fee of public colleges and universities in Zhejiang Province has only increased by 15.4% in the past ten years, which is very limited compared with the increase of average student expenditure (102.7%). However, we still need to pay attention to the design of a tuition fee reduction system for rural and urban low-income students while maintaining a reasonable increase in tuition fees. Therefore, in the process of improving the financial system of higher education, we need to pay attention to improving the tuition standard setting and student financial assistance system.
1.1.2 The internal funding structure of colleges and universities has not been optimized
At present, the investment allocation of finance at all levels to different âstatusâ universities is not balanced, and the financial funds obtained by central universities and local universities are quite different.2 There is also a big gap in the average financial allocation of colleges and universities students in different provinces. Moreover, the internal funding structure of colleges and universities has not been optimized, and the financial allocation based on the average student comprehensive quota lacks the quota per teacher, which leads to the lack of a stable source of teachersâ basic scientific research activities.
Yingsheng Zhao, director of the Department of Comprehensive Reform of the Ministry of Education, pointed out at the first National Symposium on University Development, Fund Raising and Investment that âin recent years, the central government has increased the investment in per student funds, and the scientific research funds have also increased by a large margin. It seems that our universities are not short of money, but it seems that the fund structure hasnât been optimizedâ (Li, 2014). This kind of unreasonable structure not only exists in the large difference between the aforementioned universities under the administration of Chinaâs Ministry of Education (MOE) and local universities in the proportion of financial allocation but also in the universities directly under the Ministry of Education based only on the average student comprehensive quota (the average student comprehensive quota does not cover teachersâ scientific research expenses, only teachersâ wages and welfare expenses). Lacking the average teacher quota, as a result, there is no stable source for teachers to carry out basic scientific research activities. At present, among the six categories of âproject expenditure budgetâ implemented by the universities directly under the Ministry of Education, the âbasic research business expenses of Central Universities and special funds for top innovative talents in basic disciplinesâ in the âother categoriesâ are also competitive funds in the internal allocation of universities, rather than noncompetitive funds to guarantee all teachers to engage in basic scientific research activities.3
1.1.3 Under the ânew normalâ of Chinaâs economic development, the support of financial funds for talent cultivation in colleges and universities is insufficient
As China moves toward becoming a high-income country, its economic development depends on industrial upgrading, technological progress, and talent dividends. This puts forward higher requirements for higher education. Colleges and universities have a long way to go in the work of high-quality talent cultivation and scientific and technological innovation. In 2010, the âExcellent Engineer Education and Cultivation Planâ was implemented. In August 2012, the Ministry of Education promulgated the âBasic Requirements for Entrepreneurship Education for Ordinary Undergraduate Students (Trial)â, comprehensively promoting the scientific, institutionalized and standardized construction of entrepreneurship education in colleges and universities. In November 2013, the Ministry of Education, together with the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, formulated and promulgated the âOpinions on Further Promoting the Reform of the Cultivation Mode of Professional Degree Postgraduatesâ. The âopinionsâ proposed to establish a cultivation mode of professional degree postgraduates with Chinese characteristics, which is suitable for economic and social development. The basic principles include guided by professional needs, focusing on the training of practical ability, and taking the combination of production and learning as the way. The â5 + 3â mode of the comprehensive reform of clinical medical education in China, jointly implemented by Fudan University, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Tongji University, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Second Military Medical University, and the âthree-three systemâ undergraduate talent cultivation system reform of Nanjing University are beneficial practical explorations made by colleges and universities to adapt to the changes in the talent demand specifications of economic and social development. In recent years, the construction of âNew Engineeringâ has become an important starting point of engineering talent cultivation. Under the guidance of the Ministry of Education, it has successively carried out many discussions and formed the âFudan Consensusâ, âTianda Actionâ, and âBeijing Guideâ, aiming at speeding the construction of New Engineering. In 2017, the Ministry of Education issued the notice on carrying out New Engineering research and practice, and in 2018 issued the notice on publishing the first batch of New Engineering research and practice projects, which identified the first batch of 202 comprehensive reform projects and 410 professional reform projects. By the end of 2019, nine engineering universities (Harbin Institute of Technology, Tianjin University, Southeast University, Tongji University, Beijing Institute of Technology, Chongqing University, Dalian University of Technology, South China University of Technology, and Northwest Polytechnical University) jointly issued the âNew Engineering Education Quality Declaration of Excellent Universities Allianceâ, forming the excellent universities alliance, to explore the New Engineering talent cultivation system of âthree complete educationâ and âfive education simultaneouslyâ with the New Engineering construction as the carrier. The rapid development and reform of Chinaâs higher education need sufficient funds. However...