美国高等教育经费来源多元化及其运行机制研究——基于哈佛大学与密歇根大学的案例分析

Research on Diversification of Funding Sources and Operating Mechanisms in U.S. Higher Education—A Case Study of Harvard University and the University of Michigan

摘要: 在高等教育成本持续上升和财政资源约束不断增强的背景下，如何构建多元、稳定且可持续的高校经费保障体系，成为高等教育治理的重要议题。本文基于约翰斯通高等教育成本分担理论，以哈佛大学和密歇根大学为案例，从政府财政投入、学费收入、社会捐赠、科研经费和投资收益等方面分析美国研究型大学经费来源及其运行机制。研究发现，美国研究型大学已形成政府投入、学生及家庭成本分担、社会捐赠、竞争性科研资助和高校资产运营等多主体、多渠道参与的经费体系。多元化筹资不仅拓展了高校资源来源，也增强了大学资源配置自主性，为教学科研创新和长期发展提供了重要支撑；其中，成熟的校友网络与捐赠机制、竞争性科研资助以及捐赠基金投资运营，是高校提升资源动员能力和财务自主性的重要机制。同时，多元化经费体系也存在明显局限：高校财政资源仍受到政府政策和政治环境变化的影响，社会捐赠和科研资源有可能向高声誉、高实力高校进一步集中，由此产生资源“马太效应”，加剧不同高校之间的发展分化。研究认为，美国高校经费多元化的核心并非单纯增加资金来源，而是通过多元主体共同分担成本、市场与社会力量参与资源配置，在增强大学自主性的同时建立相应的社会责任与问责机制。

Abstract: Against the backdrop of continuously rising higher education costs and increasingly constrained fiscal resources, how to establish a diversified, stable, and sustainable funding system for higher education has become an important issue in higher education governance. Based on Johnstone’s theory of cost sharing in higher education, this study takes Harvard University and the University of Michigan as case studies and examines the funding sources and operating mechanisms of U.S. research universities from the perspectives of government financial support, tuition revenue, private donations, research funding, and investment returns. The findings indicate that U.S. research universities have developed a funding system characterized by the participation of multiple stakeholders and diverse funding channels, including government investment, cost sharing by students and their families, private donations, competitive research funding, and university asset management. Diversified funding not only broadens universities’ resource bases but also enhances their autonomy in resource allocation, thereby providing important support for teaching, research innovation, and long-term institutional development. Among these mechanisms, well-established alumni networks and donation systems, competitive research funding, and endowment investment and management play important roles in strengthening universities’ capacity to mobilize resources and their financial autonomy. At the same time, the diversified funding system has significant limitations. Universities remain vulnerable to changes in government policies and the political environment, while private donations and research resources may become increasingly concentrated in institutions with higher academic reputation and stronger research capacity. This concentration can generate a “Matthew effect” in resource allocation and exacerbate disparities in institutional development. The study argues that the essence of funding diversification in U.S. higher education lies not simply in increasing the number of funding sources, but in establishing a system in which multiple stakeholders share the costs of higher education and market and social forces participate in resource allocation, while strengthening university autonomy alongside corresponding mechanisms of social responsibility and accountability.