|
The Compass
Bill Tierney
University Professor
Wilbur-Kieffer Professor of Higher Education, Director,
Center for Higher Education Policy
Analysis University of Southern California,
WPH701 Los Angeles,
CA 90089-4037
213-740-7218
www.usc.edu/dept/chepa
|
|
Over the last several years the Center has expanded its focus on international higher education in several ways. Most recently, I returned from a sabbatical in Malaysia and Australia where I was struck yet again by how out of the mainstream most of American higher education is with regard to global currents. Although many of us currently think of higher education as a market, I remain unconvinced that such thinking is a fruitful metaphor for strategic planning about how the university should be involved beyond our borders. Joseph Stiglitz has noted how universities are in the business of knowledge production. "Knowledge is a public good," he observes, "and restricting knowledge leads to inefficiency - a lower pace of innovation."
Stiglitz's point is not simply about universities in the United States. He argues instead about the need to create an innovation fund for universities in the developing world. Let's take his idea one step further.
Few dispute that privatization is a world-wide trend. The public support of higher education has lessened, universities increasingly have to rely on external resources, and for-profit higher education is among the fastest growing sectors. Whether we look at the United States, Malaysia, Australia or Chile, such observations are commonplace. A great deal of hand-wringing occurs as many of us worry about the state's commitment to 'the public good.' Concomitant with discussions about privatization and the rise of for-profit colleges and universities are observations about how globalization is driving, or at least contributing, to these changes. Relatedly, we see public and private colleges and universities creating campuses and dual degree programs around the world. One area where such activities are not taking place, however, is in what Ashraf Ghani and Clare Lockhart call 'failed states.' A failed state is one that is unable to govern itself and provide the citizens with a stable daily life and a chance at prosperity. To eradicate poverty, or to reduce terrorism, they argue, a functioning state must be in existence. Increasing foreign aid or ceding functions of the state to outside aid agencies will not produce long-term stability. Afghanistan and Somalia are examples of failed states, and the estimate is that over two billion people live in such countries. In addition to being dangerous places to live and work, there is usually not much legitimate money to be made in a country that is on the brink of, or has just recovered from, war. For-profit institutions can not see a profit. Private and public universities see no benefit to their involvement in such countries. The result is that branch campuses or dual degree programs are largely absent in failed states because they are not a productive 'market.'
Over the next three years the Center will be looking at the question of how universities might be more involved working with failed states to promote what my colleague Simon Marginson has called "global public goods." Such a point could note more forcefully made about how to help states that are in need of economic, political and social reform. I recognize that this observation is fraught with challenges. If universities become involved in a manner that typifies colonialism, then supporting failed states in their higher education endeavors could do more harm than good. Many college and university leaders will question how involvement of this sort could be of any benefit to the home institution. Faculty will surely question the wisdom of involvement in universities where terror and violence are common. Such observations are important and we intend to consider them in this undertaking. >Universities historically have had two crucial roles. They have trained individuals for professional jobs, and they have enabled civil discourse to occur by a commitment to academic freedom. Failed states have a crucial need for both of these roles. If local universities do not train local citizens for professional jobs then the state remains subservient to international agencies and their managers. Ultimately, a failed state has to have the human capital to staff its agencies, businesses, and schools. Without an arena where civil discourse is enabled to occur, the primary means of communication remains through violent acts. If those of us in universities eschew involvement in failed states, then who will fill these roles? In an era of globalization, don't those of us in higher education have an obligation for more active, sustained engagement in failed states as part of a contribution and investment in global public goods?
--Bill Tierney
|
