RIETI Policy Symposium

Universities of the Future from Social and Economic Perspectives

Information

Session 1: "The Role and Future Issues of National Universities"

Session Chair

  • TANAKA Hideaki (Associate Professor, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University)

Overview

  • TAMAI Katsuya (Faculty Fellow, RIETI / Professor, Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo)

Presentation: "The Role and Future Issues of National Universities"

  • SHIMA Kazunori (Associate Professor, Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University)

Discussant

  • HATAKENAKA Sachi (Independent Consultant / Researcher)

Session Outline

In Session 1, three reports were presented on the subject of "The Role and Future Issues of National Universities." As a preface to discussing university reform and issues related to management subsidies and the assessment of education and research, the discussions of Session 1 focused on the role and functions that universities are performing or should be performing.

Katsuya Tamai Report

"Management subsidies" (operational grants) constitute the main financial resource for the operation of Japan's national university corporations. The criteria for the allocation of the "nondiscretionary portion" of these funds have not been published. However, according to the investigations conducted by our group, the allocation is proportional to the number of teaching staff. Moreover, it is believed that allocations remain influenced by the methods in practice prior to the incorporation of national universities (allotment per course/subject, expense "per faculty," laboratory/non-laboratory courses, focus on graduate schools).

In changing the allocation method, the functions that are performed (or should be performed) by national universities need to be re-examined.

The functions performed by national universities can be examined in reference to the following two axes: (1) education versus research, and (2) central versus regional areas. On the first axis, some would argue that education and research are closely intertwined and inseparable. While some basic research may be fully integrated with education, it is possible to argue that education and research can in fact be separated in the fields of advanced research. In regard to the second axis, it is unrealistic to expect all national universities located throughout Japan's 47 prefectures to perform the same functions.

It can be argued that centrally located universities should play a nationwide role while universities located in outlying regional areas should take on more regional roles. In this context, the purpose of the central universities would be to develop human resources on the national level, conduct research on the international level, and contribute to the national economy. On the other hand, the purpose of regional universities would be separately determined by each region. Furthermore, management subsidies would be combined with local allocation tax grants to be managed in an integrated fashion.

On the other hand, because universities have long-term goals it can be argued that their management should not be delegated to mayors, governors, and local assemblies that are subject to short-term changes based on election results. There is the idea that universities can be divided into research-oriented universities and education-oriented universities. But research comes in various forms, such as "pure research" and "research as a money tree." Education also comes in various forms such as "fundamental human resource development" and "advanced expert development." The question remains as to which type of research or education should be emphasized.

There are three issues to be considered in discussing the restructuring of universities. (1) It is impossible to change the function of a university while keeping the same people and personnel systems in place. Under the conventional personnel system no particular consideration was given to the specialization of functions. A major reshuffling of personnel will be necessary if the functions of universities are to be changed. (2) Research and education are brand-sensitive industries. Competition between institutions with different brand values is predicated on the existence of significant handicaps. In order to realize "intra-brand competition" it may be necessary to reorganize all universities located in the Tokyo area as parts of a single "University of Tokyo." It is also necessary to consider organizational scales that will enable the assignment of personnel depending on each researcher's career stage. (3) It is necessary to simultaneously consider the macro-level governance of all national universities on the national level, and the micro-level governance of individual universities.

The following are five proposals concerning the direction of university reform: (1) Separate the educational functions of universities (including basic research that is closely intertwined and inseparable from education) from their advanced research functions. (2) Allocate the nondiscretionary part of management subsidies to the education function. (3) Reorganize national universities into large-scale entities comprising numerous small-scale organizations. (4) Promote "intra-brand competition" within large-scale national universities. (5) Ensure a high level of faculty mobility between research and educational organizations and units.

Questions and Answers

The following questions were received from the floor.

Q: Notwithstanding the tides of internationalization and globalization, I doubt that applying the experiences of other countries will lead to success in Japan. I believe that keeping the Japanese context in mind will be conducive to more effective university governance and ultimately to Japan's national interest. What are your views on this matter?

A: The question does not allow for a simple answer. Obviously, it is important to have a full understanding of Japanese conditions. But if we fail to have an accurate grasp on what is happening in other countries, Japan may be doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past. Will Japanese universities be able to attract Japan's best and brightest? This is the question that worries me. In the past, there was an assurance that Japan's young people would attend Japanese universities because this was a captive market and the main concern was how the pie would be divided up among Japanese universities. In the future, the size of the pie itself is going to shrink rapidly. In any type of market, it is absolutely essential to know and to understand the competition.

Q: Has the reorganization of national universities into independent administrative institutions created any changes in cooperation between universities and industry? Or, did the reorganization have little impact in this respect?

A: From my perspective on the front lines of this issue, I think that change has failed to occur because incentives for change are weak. Under the present rules, funds are allotted to new initiatives only when the Ministry of Education deems the initiative to be worthy. No channels have been developed for direct evaluation by the market. This is the current situation in Japan.

Kazunori Shima Report

The debate concerning the method of allocation of management subsidies (competitive funding versus basic funding) must be grounded in an understanding of the actual roles (functions) played by national universities. This report provides material for considering the method of allocation of management subsidies to national universities.

The following four points are presented based on observations of the actual functions of national universities.

  1. National universities play a central role in the following three functions: research, research-based university extension, and graduate education.
  2. Regionally oriented national universities perform a certain percentage of the above three functions (30%-50%). The importance of these functions becomes clearer when fields of specialty are viewed separately (50%-100% contribution per each function).
  3. On a prefecture-by-prefecture basis, national universities account for more than 70% of the research function and research-based university extension function in nearly all prefectures.
  4. At the individual institutional level, it can be seen that regionally oriented national universities exercise their integrated university extension function through a variety of linkages with a wide range of stakeholders. On a prefectural level, national universities are centers for the creation and application of knowledge. In this context, regionally oriented national universities perform the dual functions of "national universities" and "regional universities."

There are three policy ramifications.

  1. A number of university leagues should be created based on specific properties, and funds should be reallocated based on assessments conducted within these leagues. The intent of this scheme would be to realize inter-university competition. However, measures should be taken to prevent the concentration of funds in specific universities, which would create problems in the assignment of functions within the national university system.
  2. Regional location should be taken into account when reallocating funds. Measures should be taken to prevent the concentration of funds in specific regions from exceeding the scope of individual prefectures, which would create problems in the regional assignment of functions within the national university system.
  3. Market and virtual-market based evaluations for the allocation of funds (joint and commissioned research, various types of competitive funding) should be excluded from the criteria used by the National University Corporation Evaluation Committee for the allocation of management subsidies. The purpose of this exclusion would be to avoid evaluation results for certain functions from having a double impact on the allocation of funds.��

The following three issues are important for future consideration.

  1. Using domestic competition as a foundation, national universities should work toward improving their international competitiveness in the research function, research-based university extension function, and inter-university competition.
  2. Regionally oriented national universities should maintain and strengthen their division of functions with the national university system (research function, research-based university extension function, and graduate education function), and should seek to strengthen their various functions through domestic competition. Regionally oriented national universities can become regional centers for the creation and development of knowledge only when they perform the research function, research-based university function and graduate education function of national universities.
  3. A simple dichotomy of national universities focusing on research and regionally oriented national universities focusing on education carries the risk of overlooking the important functions that are being currently performed by regionally oriented national universities.

Questions and Answers

The following questions were received from the floor.

Q: Students join the labor force after graduating from university. However, my impression is that there is absolutely no feedback from the business community in this area. The business community probably expresses its views and expectations for universities in various forms. What is your understanding of this?

A: After their incorporation as independent administrative institutions, the organizational structure of national universities has changed in a way that these universities are able to respond to and assimilate the needs of society better than in the past. Within a certain range, the needs of the business community are being taken into account in the allocation of competitive funds. There is no doubt that much remains to be done, but the national universities are improving and moving in the right direction. Talking about the "needs of the business community" can be very vague. One solution would be to utilize systems such as corporate-funded courses.

Q: You have used the number of published academic papers as a criterion for determining the distribution of fields of specialty. However, your typology of institutions is based on the allocation of research funds. Why did you use two different criteria?

A: This was necessary due to data constraints. My data did not allow me to compare the number of papers published by national, public, and private universities. All that I could do was to make this comparison among national universities. On the other hand, it was not possible to aggregate the data on the allocation of Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research by fields of specialty. So, the use of two different criteria was unavoidable for purely technical reasons.

Q: Suppose the typology of institutions was to be examined from the perspective of research results and the number of academic papers published. Do you expect that this would change the conclusions concerning the research functions performed by national universities?

A: I cannot make any definitive statements without the proper data on hand. However, we obviously have a certain level of functional specialization among national, public, and private universities. Naturally, private universities can be expected to be at the forefront of research in certain fields of specialization. This would be reflected in the allocation of Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research. We need to think about funding in the context of what the real situation is. But I would like to add that it is not my conclusion that private universities should simply focus on education.

Sachi Hatakenaka Report

Understanding the present situation is of course important in considering problems and issues related to national universities. But present functions are built on their past legacies, and there is no reason to conclude that national universities will be playing the same roles in the future. Future needs must be separately explored.

There is intense international debate on the role of universities in the knowledge-based economy. What emerges from these debates is a typology of universities delineated by the following two axes: (A) Basic scientific orientation, and (B) Response to economic needs. Quadrant 1 consists of basic research-oriented universities with high (A) and low (B). Quadrant 2 consists of universities with high (A) and high (B) as represented by some U.S. research universities. This is the type of university that many countries find to be most desirable for the future. Quadrant 3 consists of institutions with low (A) and high (B) as represented by polytechnics. These are institutions of higher education that contribute importantly to economic needs through education and research. Quadrant 4 consists of universities with low (A) and low (B) as represented by liberal arts colleges. These institutions do not specialize, but instead provide education that is intended to foster broad learning and analytical skills.

How do Japanese national universities fit into this typology? It seems we have the "raw materials" for two types of economically responsive institutions: Quadrant 2 universities with strengths in basic and applied research, and Quadrant 3 universities focused on professional education combined with applied research and graduate education. These consist of the following: national universities performing research functions and making major contributions in research, and regional universities conducting research and providing graduate education in specific fields of specialization. However, Japanese universities have significant undeveloped potential in terms of both basic science orientation and economic responsiveness. National universities are notable for their potential, but still remain underdeveloped. One of the challenges for the future will be to create an environment conducive to organic growth and competition between this diverse range of specialized universities and private universities.

There are three important governance issues at the national level.

  1. Government sources of funding should be diversified to promote diversification among universities. But it will not be enough to have a wide variety of government agencies investing in universities. What is required is diversity in the methods and contents of funding.
  2. In the U.S. there is a very strong belief that "universities are useful" and that "basic research leads to innovation." Hence, the government's position on universities is quite different from other countries. It should not be forgotten that the government's position on universities has played an important role in fostering universities that are responsive to the needs of society.
  3. The use of simple indicators will lead to the loss of diversity.

A primary issue of governance on the institutional level concerns the question of how to make organizational infrastructure responsive to economic needs. There are three key questions to be considered.

  1. How can the institution support interdisciplinary research centers that function as organizational infrastructure for supporting and fostering new research and new education?
  2. Is the organization adapted to both bottom-up and top-down decision-making?
How sensitive is the organization to external developments? How well developed is the external networking function at all levels of the organization?

Questions and Answers

The following questions were received from the floor.

Q: Students join the labor force after graduating from university. However, my impression is that there is absolutely no feedback from the business community. The business community probably expresses its views and expectations for universities in various forms. What is your understanding of this?

A: That is the most fundamental requirement in creating universities that are responsive to economic and social needs. Japanese universities have tended to adopt new educational programs in a very uniform and standardized manner. In the future, educational programs will have to be created by professionals with a keen eye on social needs. In this regard, Ireland presents a very good example. As a prelude to creating programs, universities should research the needs of the business community. However, it must be understood that businesses want skills that can immediately be put to use, and these corporate needs may not correspond with what is best for the individual. Therefore, professional judgment is required in formulating programs. This is an essential requirement.