This article aims to examine the emergence of a system of multi-level governance in Higher Education quality assurance during recent decades in Spain, as a particular case within the European Space of Higher Education. Although there is a well-established multi-level structure in the governance of this area at the European level, it is not very common to find countries having an internal multi-level configuration. Most countries have allocated quality assurance at the national level, either concentrating ...
This article aims to examine the emergence of a system of multi-level governance in Higher Education quality assurance during recent decades in Spain, as a particular case within the European Space of Higher Education. Although there is a well-established multi-level structure in the governance of this area at the European level, it is not very common to find countries having an internal multi-level configuration. Most countries have allocated quality assurance at the national level, either concentrating responsibilities into a single agency or allowing competition between accreditation bodies. Thus, the Spanish scenario stands out as very singular model for the governance of Higher Education quality assurance, deserving attention to comprehend the intricacies of its coordination. Here we examine its development over the last two decades, and discuss three factors that have shaped inter-agencies' relations: first, the sequence of agency creation and their accumulated expertise; second, the role of institutional structures for multi-level coordination; and third, informal practices related to inter-governmental relations, and the influence of country administrative traditions. From discussing this case, this article identifies three key lessons for understanding agency relations in multilevel governance environments: first, path dependence significantly impacts-regulatory interactions over time; second, the Administrative culture, particularly centralist traditions, considerably shapes relationships in multi-level bodies; and, third, the coordination models in regulatory networks (hierarchical, network or market-based) tend to reflect those underlying political dynamics.
+