On the Politics of University Autonomy

Public and private universities are currently being scrutinized by politicians and political activists in ways that they have not been in many years. Moreover, government officials at both the state and federal level are intervening in the internal affairs of universities in ways that are nearly unprecedented.

These political interventions were predictable (indeed, I was among those predicting them), but they pose extraordinary challenges to traditional ways in which universities have operated and to the future of higher education in America. The normative and public policy questions surrounding greater political supervision of universities are difficult and real.

In a new paper I take a more empirical and positive political theory approach to our current situation. There is an extensive literature on the politics of “independent” government institutions, from the judiciary to bureaucracies to central banks to international organizations. The conceptual apparatus and logic of those models can be turned toward thinking about the political conditions and political boundaries of university autonomy from government interventions.

This paper on “The Bounded Independence of American Universities” is, I believe, the first effort to develop an empirical model of university independence. It emphasizes that the lessons from other contexts apply to universities as well. No matter how normatively attractive an independent judiciary or an independent university might be, institutional independence is a political construct and must be maintained through political effort. And “independent” institutions are always politically vulnerable to being rendered less independent if they become too politically costly. Strategic university leaders should recognize that university autonomy is politically contingent and cannot simply be assumed. Unfortunately, university faculty and administrators have become forgetful that university independence, like judicial independence, rests on political foundations.

From the abstract:

State universities are agents of the state. As such, they are subject to the same political dynamics as other state institutions. There are normative reasons for preferring that some state institutions enjoy a substantial degree of independence from ordinary political forces, but there are significant political challenges to achieving such independence. Universities are no different. Achieving and preserving some degree of independence from political control for universities is an ongoing political task, and the independence of universities from political influence and intervention is bounded and contingent.

And from the conclusion:

The fact that university autonomy is politically bounded and conditional does not mean that independence is not real. It just means that there are limits. Those limits are not themselves fixed, but they are not necessarily under the control of the university. Universities can do what they can to demonstrate their societal value. They can persuade critical stakeholders that continued autonomy is important to generating that societal value. Like all agents, they must convince their principals that they are faithful agents whose interests largely align with those of the principals and who exercise their discretion in a prudential fashion. They must cultivate allies who share an interest in the relative autonomy of universities and can exert political pressure on their behalf. The conditions for university autonomy must be cultivated over time, and sometimes the terms of institutional independence have to be renegotiated to better conform to the political environment within which universities operate.

Read the whole thing here.

The post On the Politics of University Autonomy appeared first on Reason.com.