Academia

Universities and their students have been in the news and as usual it’s about money. How does this relate to Blacka? As it happens universities are at the back of much of what happens here, and it’s instructive to see how money for the universities is integral to the contentious issues that this blog has commented on. University teachers want jobs and to get their courses to operate they need to attract students. That also keeps the vice chancellors happy. Courses on landscape, conservation, wildlife and biodiversity have been getting more popular. But the students want jobs at the end of their courses. If there’s no prospect of work they won’t apply for the courses. Wildlife trusts are just the place where they can hope to find jobs. The really big conservation problems are not in this country but very few graduates finish up working at enhancing the biodiversity in South America. I suspect that there are more such courses more students and more graduates in countries where there are fewer problems. This is the paradox and the problem to be resolved. People can’t do the job of saving the planet’s biodiversity where it really matters so they pursue an existence and a career doing something that has marginal relevance. It is the classic bureaucratic jobsworth dilemma: the big problem is shelved because the difficulties are just too great while you get on with tinkering at the edges. So someone has to find jobs for these tinkering people and the kind of jobs they want to do in this country are largely office jobs, an essential part of which is the production of self justifying reports. Rarely does an academic within that area of the curriculum challenge this. In fact it is in their interest that the absurdity continues. Now ask yourself who should pay for these courses!