In an era in which government support is not always solidly displayed for higher education, universities must do more to demonstrate relevance to local communities.
Speaking at the Univeristas 21 Leadership Summit in Glasgow, which brought 31 world-leading universities together, Anton Muscatelli, former principal and vice-chancellor at University of Glasgow, said institutions must take a broader, more outward-facing approach.
Demonstrating impact is not just about graduate earnings or economic impact, he said, sharing insights from work done for the University of Glasgow’s civic strategy. “[People are asking]: what’s it doing for me? What’s it doing for my community?”
The comments come amid growing debate globally around universities’ ‘social licence’ – the extent to which they are trusted and seen as delivering public good.
Michael Wesley, deputy vice-chancellor, global, culture and engagement at University of Melbourne in Australia, went further, stating, “rankings are, I think, absolute poison in terms of social licence”.
He continued, “When much of the public hears about a university like Melbourne trumpeting its rankings, what they’re thinking is, ‘Oh, there you go again. It’s all about you and your privilege and your prestige, and you don’t really care about anyone else.”
Wesley distilled his view on how universities need to better engage. “We’re going through a detailed mapping process of what we are actually doing and then we’re going to say: what aren’t we doing? Where are the communities that we need to play a positive role with, and working more with them, being a lot more present.”
He cited polling in Australia which revealed a broad swathe of the public who “when we probe into it, they don’t understand what universities do”, beyond educating people.
“People just don’t understand what research is, and I think we’ve got an enormous challenge in educating people about what research does and why it’s important for society, and we’ve been failing for a long time.”
Also joining the debate was Jess Lister, director (education) at UK polling agency Public First, who shared data which revealed a majority of UK adults polled agreed or strongly agreed that universities prioritised status and ranking over how students fared after leaving university.
She told The PIE, “In the UK, our research shows that social licence is as much to do with what a working-class parent in Nottingham, Glasgow or York sees as the benefit of higher education to their family and their town as it is Nobel prizes, league tables, and REF impact.”
“The public is not primarily asking whether higher education is ‘good’ in the abstract. They are asking whether universities are on their side, whether students get a fair return, whether local communities can see the benefit, and whether public money is being used for outcomes that feel real. That is a much tougher test for institutions to meet.”
Examples of successful strategy and engagement were shared by Muscatelli – such as community grants, partnerships with further education colleges, and involvement in regional initiatives such as health innovation hubs.
Perhaps the starkest critique came from a global health practitioner working in Nigeria, who argued that communities often experience universities as extractive.
Deborah Adeniran, programs and partnership manager, International Cancer Centre Abuja said that communities often see researchers come in, take data, publish high‑profile papers and then leave, prompting people to ask what they themselves gain from the process.
Despite thousands of academic papers on cancer care in Nigeria, she noted that fewer than 0.1% have been implemented in practice.
She argued that communities feel used, and that many participants don’t even understand what the research was about. She called on universities to “show up before the problem”, co-design projects with communities, and share both credit and resources.
Insights from the US and a Yale University study also pointed to a further complication: trust appears inversely linked to institutional prestige.
Polling cited in the discussion found that community colleges in the US are the most trusted institutions, while elite universities such as the Ivy League are among the least trusted.
“The more elite an institution, the less social licence it has,” Wesley noted.
He added a warning: “When you lose social licence, populist governments, or populist leaning governments, will follow with regulation, and poorly designed regulation, which is even more damaging for universities.”
