Aukštojo mokslo kaštų pasidalijimas tarp tiesioginių naudos gavėjų ir visuomenės

1. Lietuvoje, kaip ir kitose Vakarų Europos šalyse, aukštasis mokslas tampa masinis. Lietuvoje lėšos, skiriamos vienam aukštosios mokyklos studentui, yra vienos mažiausių tarp Vakarų Europos šalių. Mažos išlaidos aukštajam mokslui lė-mė studijų kokybės prastėjimą. 2. Visuomenė turi padengti dalį aukštojo mokslo kaštų, nes jis teikia visuomeninę naudą, pasireiškiančią teigiamais išori-niais poveikiais. Valstybinį aukštojo mokslo finansavimą le-mia ir kapitalo rinkų apribojimai, investicijų į aukštąjį moks-lą rizika, ir privačių galimybių drausti mokymosi riziką ne-buvimas. Politiniuose debatuose subsidijos aukštajam moks-lui grindžiamos teisingumo argumentais. 3. Aukštasis mokslas teikia ne tik visuomeninės, bet ir privačios naudos, todėl jos gavėjai turi prisidėti prie aukštojo mokslo finansavimo. Privati investicinė nauda pasireiškia didesniu aukštąjį mokslą baigusių darbuotojų darbo užmokesčiu, geresnėmis užimtumo galimybėmis, stipresniu prisirišimu prie darbo rinkos. 4. Ekonomikos teorija rodo, kad aukštojo mokslo finansavimas yra regresinis, nes visi mokesčių mokėtojai finansuoja paslaugą, iš kurios tiesioginę naudą turi tik dalis gyventojų. Si-ekiant padidinti aukštojo mokslo prieinamumą ir studijų kokybę, būtina didinti studijų įmokas. Studijų įmokos turėtų būti kintamos, priklausyti nuo kaštų ir paklausos. 5. Prieš didinant įmokas, reikėtų sudaryti galimybę visiems studentams gauti paskolas studijų įmokoms apmokėti ir gyvenimo kaštams padengti. Dabar teikiamas užstato tipo paskolas reikėtų pakeisti pajamų sąlyginėmis paskolomis, kai paskolos grąžinimas yra pajamų funkcija, o egzogeninis kintamasis yra laikas, per kurį bus grąžinta studijų paskola.Development of modern knowledge economics enhances importance of education policy. Nowadays, tertiary education systems of developed countries become more and more massed. Such development of tertiary education is necessary and desirable. However, most of countries, including those with very high economies, face the problems of financing for tertiary education, possibilities to guarantee additional financing, cost distribution between direct beneficiaries of tertiary education and society. In Lithuania, during the last ten years, number of students increased more than three times, however the means, assigned for tertiary education, increased much slower. Therefore, financing per student is 2.4 times lower than in 25 EU member states according to the standards of purchasing power. The governments of all countries subsidize tertiary education. Traditional argument for public financing of tertiary education is positive external benefit and stimulation of economic growth. The subsidies to tertiary education stimulate investment into human capital; otherwise they would be ineffectively low due to positive external benefit. Other arguments for national financing of tertiary education are related with imperfect markets of loans for studies, risks of investment into tertiary education, absence of possibilities to insure risks of studies. Tertiary education provides not only public, but also private benefit, demonstrated by much higher wages of graduates in comparison with the ones of employees, who have graduated from secondary schools. Calculations made by the author of the present article demonstrate that private rate of return to tertiary education in Lithuania is sufficiently high, it is higher than rates of return from other assets and it reaches 12.87%. Other private benefit is related with lower risks of unemployment, longer participation in labour market. As much as tertiary education provides not only public but also private benefit, proper distribution of education costs between the beneficiaries is necessary. It is socially fair and effective if students pay for private benefit and tax payers contribute to it by providing subsidies, coinciding with the external benefit. Mass system of tertiary education requires rather considerable supplement of private resources to public financing. Besides, the government becomes incapable to finance development of tertiary education upon increase of competition for public resources. It is necessary to enhance extend of private financing in Lithuania, whereas financing using taxes is regressive. An average taxpayer finances a service, which provides benefit only to part of residents. Having enhanced financing of Lithuanian tertiary education using private resources, i.e. increasing fees for studies, the regress of financing of tertiary education would decrease. It would be socially fair and economically effective, if the graduates cover the most part of costs of studies. The government should give loans in order to finance increasing fees for studies and costs of living. Currently used in the country, loans of mortgage type should be changed to income-contingent loans, which are to be returned by a fixed part of the graduate’s future income. Development of tertiary education based on graduates’ contribution depending on future income is a highroad striving to increase availability and quality of tertiary education