Mergers and splits – Are we creating pseudo-universities?

Globally, mergers, perhaps even more so than splits, have become a typical phenomenon in higher education systems. Attesting to this claim, there is a growing body of literature on mergers, particularly in the Western context.

Usually, there is an array of reasons justifying mergers and splits of higher education institutions in various countries. Typical justifications include the need to improve efficiency, reinforce regional relevance, decentralise and stimulate diversity within the sector, reduce costs, and-or increase quality and excellence.

The first merger in Mozambique announced last year involved the unification of the Higher Institute for International Relations (Instituto Superior de Relações Internacionais or ISRI) and the Higher Institute for Public Administration (Instituto Superior de Adminstração Pública or ISAP) into one new university to be named after the former president of Mozambique, Joaquim Alberto Chissano.

Dedicated task forces to examine and lead the merger and separation process were convened and, although the task forces were given the mandate to study the conditions for the process, no reports have been made available to the public since their inception. Moreover, in some cases, there has been a failure to consult academic staff at affected institutions.

Task force members are retired academic and managerial staff from various universities and while some members are recognised scholars in their particular area or higher education managers, the majority are not known for their expertise in the field of higher education research. Being a retired academic or academic manager, with no obvious conflict of interest in any of the institutions involved, seems to have been the main criterion for the selection of the task force members.

New regional universities

On 29 January this year, the second oldest university in Mozambique, the Pedagogical University (UP), was split. The UP had scattered satellite campuses, or so-called delegations, in 10 of the 11 provinces, with its headquarters located in Maputo.

The split of UP is expected to lead to the establishment of five new 'regional' universities, in the following configuration:

• • The University of Rovuma (UniRovuma), named after the Rovuma river, with its headquarters in Nampula, including the former UP branches in Niassa and Cabo Delgado provinces;
  
  
• • The University of Licungo (Unilicungo), named after the Licungo river, with its headquarters in the Zambezia province capital, Quelimane, comprising the former UP branch campuses in Quelimane and Beira;
  
  
• • The University of Púnguè (UniPúnguè), with its headquarters in Manica province, yet incorporating the former UP branch campus in Tete province;
  
  
• • The University of Save (Unisave), with its headquarters in Maxixe, in Inhambane province, including the former UP branches in Gaza province; and
  
  
• • The University of Maputo (UniMaputo), named after the Maputo river and capital city.

The newest universities join universities established after the millennium and also named after rivers. They include the University of Zambezi (UniZambeze) established in 2007, and the University of Lúrio (Universidade Lúrio) established in 2006, located in the Zambezia and Nampula provinces, respectively.

Following the national restructuring trend – and considering that there are still many more rivers in the country after which institutions can be named – the Mozambican higher education system might soon feature even more river-named universities.

Unanswered questions

What is the problem which the mergers and-or splits are trying to solve? The arguments in favour of or against the measures seem to have been restricted and discussed in closed circles, including the National Council on Higher Education (CNES), a board which advises the government on higher education policy.

The general public as well as higher education experts were by and large overlooked. Occasionally, usually following a CNES session, the minister in charge of the higher education portfolio would make very broad statements, often through press releases or interviews, alluding to some of the reasons behind the mergers or splits. The measures were frequently presented as a solution to a problem which, at least in the public sphere, has never been adequately explained.

Furthermore, the fate of the former UP, ISRI or ISAP was never discussed at any public debate, let alone an academic conference. What publicly accessible information there is suggests that reasons to justify the measures are of a financial and managerial nature.

In the case of UP, there has been a perception that the institution had degenerated into a so-called “giant with feet of clay” in the sense that it had become a big institution with more than 40,000 students scattered over its various campuses – which were often suspected to offer low-quality higher education as they lacked basic infrastructure and qualified academic staff.

Other reasons cited include the need for increased access, in a context where less than 7% of 18 to 24-year-old population is actually enrolled in higher education. While the need to increase participation rates might be a legitimate reason to establish new higher education institutions, and this has been the case in the past two decades, there is no evidence that establishing new universities, in the manner in which it has been done, is the best possible solution.

Besides, the existing public universities and institutions of higher learning suffer from severe financial limitations, budget cuts and academic staff shortfall, while most are still in the inception stages of institutional development.

It is therefore difficult to determine whether the mergers and the splits in Mozambican higher education will render the system more efficient and improve quality, as expressed in some of the few publicly available views on the matter.

The decision to merge and split seems to have emanated a while ago, and indeed before any evidence was produced by the task force or any current research publicly available.

It is often the case that major policy decisions with the potential to bring about structural changes in the higher education system are taken based on strong convictions and weak evidence. Instinctive knowledge and sketchy evidence often preside over higher education policy-making in the country.

'Post factum’ approach

Hence, the task force was of a mostly procedural, political and post factum character. The evidence to support such a critical policy decision of unprecedented scope and with unpredictable consequences seems to be sketchy and closed to public debate. The public is mostly left in the realm of speculation and distracted by unknown criteria used to name the universities after rivers.

Research on mergers in higher education elsewhere has shown that they are a challenging policy option. This seems to be the case independent of whether mergers or splits are actually implemented, or whether merger and split initiatives fulfil what they promise.

In Europe, for instance, higher education researchers have argued that reasons for merger “failures” – that is, merger outcomes which do not correspond with formal expectations – may be linked to factors other than cultural dimensions, poor management and organisation of the merger process.

As an alternative, they have drawn attention to the importance of the pre-merger process and the broader contextual and political embedding of the merger initiatives undertaken. In Mozambique, the pre-merger and -split process seems to have been embroiled in secrecy, with only occasional briefings.

Funding

In summary, there are several critical questions requiring answers.

For example, in a context characterised by growing unpredictability and volatility of government funding of the four existing public universities – Eduardo Mondlane University (UEM), UP (now former UP), Universidade Lúrio and UniZambeze, the latter two being less than 10 years old and still in their early development phase – where will the government find the financial resources to cater for five more universities, plus a growing sub-sector of polytechnic institutes, one in each of the 10 provinces?

Furthermore, did the government and its advisers consider that universities normally entail a significant commitment to research? If so, and considering that the oldest and most equipped university in the country, UEM, can barely be regarded as a research university, given its low levels of research productivity and the fact that qualified academic staff holding PhDs barely reaches 25%, how would the newly established universities defend a university status with no qualified staff and an absence of research?

The system currently counts 55 higher educational institutions, both public and private, all of them often draining academic staff from UEM, attracted by the ease of obtaining academic management positions in the newly established institution. Research and experience, including that of UEM and UP, have shown that universities often evolve from predecessor institutions such as colleges, community colleges or institutes which then grow their research and training capability to become fully-fledged universities.

The promoting entity of the new university would require extraordinary resources to provide the necessary academic infrastructure and capital to attract academic and management staff, as no university deserving such a title is born overnight by decree.

What we seem to be witnessing with the mergers and splits in Mozambique is the birth of new pseudo-universities. The post factum approach to Mozambican higher education policy which informed the mergers and splits raises concerns regarding the underlying reasons and motivations.

Patrício V Langa is a sociologist and associate professor of higher education studies. He lectures mainly in South Africa, Mozambique, Austria and Sweden. Email: patrício.langa@gmail.com