Reasons for Increased Public Support for Urban and Regional Universities
Reasons for Increased Public Support for Urban and Regional Universities.
In my earlier discussions about the financial challenges facing many urban and regional universities (Urban Lens, May 14, 2024), I described the situation as complex, explaining why this description is fitting. In a subsequent post (Urban Lens, May 21, 2024), I argued that the solution to their financial difficulties lies mostly outside their campuses, and any discretionary measures on-campus risk compromising their educational goals.
Building on this argument, I assert in this essay that these institutions create public value that goes considerably beyond the individual gains of students and local businesses. This public value stems from public investments, thus increased public subsidies (alongside private donations) are necessary for these institutions to continue their invaluable contributions to American society.
Around the turn of the century, faculty and staff at publicly funded urban and regional universities in Ohio were informed by the Ohio Department of Higher Education that henceforth, these universities would primarily prepare students for the workforce. This decision assumed that public funding for these universities should mainly promote a skilled, adaptable, and competitive workforce, driving economic growth and enhancing community prosperity.
While Ohio’s policy statement may be stated more explicitly than some other states, it is not alone in limiting its rationale for public investment in urban and regional universities to the goal of developing the workforce and preparing students for jobs.
Initially, this decision unsettled me because it implied that the benefits of university education are private rather than public. It suggested that the benefits primarily go to graduates ("the more you learn, the more you earn") and to private firms with a better-educated workforce.
Universities, however, represent a "public good" in many ways rather than a "private good." Public goods, such as national defense, street lights, or public parks, are collectively consumed by society and typically provided by the government or community.
Robust universities exemplify public goods because, besides strengthening the workforce, they enrich individuals and society through knowledge sharing, cultural enhancement, social cohesion, public health improvements, environmental sustainability, and civic engagement. Furthermore, beyond their direct beneficiaries, universities benefit the wider community by providing resources, creating new knowledge, fostering economic growth, attracting skilled professionals, enhancing quality of life, and promoting diversity.
Despite these significant contributions, the decision to focus on workforce preparation overlooked the public benefits of universities and led to financial consequences. It coincided with reductions in state subsidies for Ohio’s urban and regional universities, eventually undermining their previous ability to fulfill their broader societal roles and foreshadowing their plunge into their current financial difficulties.
Treating universities primarily as vehicles for workforce preparation risks underinvestment and misallocation of resources, jeopardizing the provision of their essential services and leading to perpetual financial shortages.
While universities are crucial for workforce development, they serve broader purposes such as fostering critical thinking, advancing knowledge, and promoting civic engagement. Recognizing the public benefits of universities strengthens the justification for public subsidies, ensuring the provision of public goods at socially optimal levels.
States like California, New York, Texas, Washington, and Illinois recognize this and are known for substantial public investments in public higher education. By prioritizing higher education beyond job preparation, they heavily subsidize tuition costs, provide financial aid, and strive to make college more accessible and affordable for their residents.
In an increasingly globalized and knowledge-based economy, states that provide greater subsidies for their public universities are more likely to lead in attracting investment, fostering innovation, and adapting to evolving industry needs. This strengthens the state's overall competitiveness nationally and internationally.
Greater state subsidies for higher education also contribute to the state’s civic development by fostering critical thinking, promoting civic engagement, and providing opportunities for students to participate in community service and activism, thus nurturing informed and active citizens who contribute to the betterment of society. In more than a few people’s perspectives, improvements in civic life are among the most important contributions universities make.
Conversely, states that neglect their urban and regional public universities financially are more likely to experience a decline in their human capital and workforce competitiveness, resulting in a less skilled workforce, hindering innovation, productivity, and economic growth. Without adequate funding for universities, talented students and faculty may seek opportunities elsewhere with better resources and support for higher education. The quality of civic life in the community, state, and nation may decline.
To mitigate these implications and address the financial crises faced by many public urban and regional universities, states may need to reconsider their approach to funding higher education, recognizing it as a critical investment in the state's future prosperity and well-being. This could involve increasing public funding, implementing tuition assistance programs, fostering public-private partnerships, and prioritizing policies that promote accessibility, affordability, and excellence in higher education.
During the financial crisis affecting urban and regional universities, it is crucial for state Departments of Higher Education to acknowledge and highlight the numerous public benefits these institutions provide. By advocating for increased public subsidies, we can better navigate this complex situation and build a more sustainable and impactful future for higher education.
A balanced approach that addresses both workforce readiness and the universities’ broader purpose of creating, preserving, transmitting and finding new applications for knowledge would better serve students and society, preserving institutional capacity and societal progress.
Bill Bowen
First, thank you so much for the commitment of $8 per month for the Urban Lens!
Your message led me to ask myself: Would more ethics conversations at universities reduce the incidence of corporate greed? Perhaps. If such conversations were to be well-structured and deeply integrated into corporate culture, they might indeed play a role in curbing greed -- by helping to foster a culture of accountability, transparency, and long-term thinking.
However, for ethics conversations to have a real impact, they need to be more than just surface-level discussions. They must be deeply embedded in corporate culture, values, and decision-making processes, including things such as strategic planning, performance evaluations, and reward systems. And in this respect, unfortunately, I find it hard to be sanguine. If my own personal experience in the military and university life is any indicator, most ethics conversations outside the classroom, such as in campus adminstrative offices and board rooms, are stylized, and engaged, perhaps begrudgingly, for purposes of meet impressing and convincing the others in the room of our high-mindedness. The relatively few times I've seen true leadership commitment to ethics conversations, and actions, it's created problems for the ones who exhibited it. I've always felt grateful for those people: they're few and far between. Still, I know of no other, better, way to stimulate more other-regarding behaviors than to do our best to get more such conversations going -- probably best when we do so with young people still in the K-12 educational system.
I've not read the article in the link you sent me, and probably will not do so for a couple days, until my travels are over and I am settled in. At that point, I'll plan to read it.
Thanks again!
Bill
Hello, Professor Bowen. I would add that another key benefit of urban and regional universities lies in the ethics conversations that they help to build and maintain in urban and regional areas (The Missing Committees: Research Ethics in the Making in Switzerland https://brill.com/view/journals/ehmh/78/2/article-p310_310.xml?language=en)
I have been trying to understand why the Purdue Pharma scandal leading to widespread opioid addiction started in Stamford, CT. I used to work in Stamford, and the legal counsel of the company where I worked told me one day that I often seemed to be the only person in the company interested in what he had to say. Stamford, CT also serves as the headquarters of Philip Morris Intl (tobacco), WWE (Worldwide Wrestling), and Digital Currency Group (cryptocurrency), along with numerous other HQs. There's one college campus in Stamford (UConn-Stamford) and it's focused on job prep. I believe that ethics conversations are missing in Stamford, CT, and the job-focused profile of the one satellite college campus there has not helped.