More than 50 Japanese universities are to close or downsize their humanities and social science departments after education minister Hakuban Shimomura urged the country’s higher education institutions to offer a “more practical, vocational education that better anticipates the needs of society”.

The move has caught the attention of academics across the world, prompting many to speak out in opposition.

“It’s shocking,” says Sophie Coloumbeau, an English lecturer at Cardiff University. “The decision implies an extremely narrow, shortsighted and, I would say, mistaken view of what society’s needs are.”

Fiona Beveridge, head of the University of Liverpool’s School of Law and Social Justice, agrees: “I don’t think the future needs of society can be met only with Stem graduates. Cultural and creative industries will require students with humanities backgrounds.”

British humanities departments, already thought by many to be underfunded, are also facing problems of government perception. Education secretary Nicky Morgan raised tensions last year with her assertion that “the subjects that keep young people’s options open and unlock the door to all sorts of careers are the Stem subjects”.

The comment angered academics across the country, including Coloumbeau. “Morgan’s statement, and others like it, set up an unproductive opposition between the humanities and sciences,” she says. “It’s important to make sure such lazy generalisations don’t translate into government policy without being effectively challenged.”



‘The implication is that esoteric research is less important’

Morgan is far from the only target of disapproval. Various higher education funding mechanisms in the UK have come in for criticism in recent years and the Research Excellence Framework has been accused of bias against the humanities.



“The implication is that more esoteric research is less important,” says Richard Black, pro-director at Soas, University of London. “The political rhetoric in the UK at present often mirrors that seen in Japan - that money should be spent on research that is directly relevant to society.



“But we must invest in cultural and historical knowledge and more theoretical research – not cut back only to areas with ‘impact’. As a current example, look at the threat Islamic State poses to archaeological sites. Now more than ever is the time to study what such sites mean: that knowledge alone is worth investing in.”



We must invest in cultural and historical knowledge and more theoretical research. Knowledge alone is worth investing in

Changes at the Higher Education Funding Council for England (Hefce) have also hit humanities departments. In 2010 Peter Mandelson, then business secretary, told the organisation that “the promotion of Stem disciplines should be a factor in all of your activities.” The organisation used £10 million to incentivise universities to push these “strategically important” subjects.

The philosophy department at Middlesex University was threatened with closure later that year. A Save Middlesex Philosophy campaign was launched, along with a Facebook group that amassed more than 10,000 members, but the department was relocated and downsized in 2013.

Martin Daunton, head of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at Cambridge University, argues that philosophy and science are intrinsically linked – and must remain so.

“How can one have an understanding of the major issues of the day – things like the ethics of stem cell research – if we move away from asking the fundamental questions that philosophy poses?” he says. “There’s a danger now of humanities becoming secondary to science, but both must work together.”



Others are concerned about the need for student demand to guarantee courses’ survival. Many fear that humanities departments – home to some subjects with notoriously low demand, such as modern foreign languages – are set to miss out as a result.

‘Specialist areas are most vulnerable’

“I am particularly concerned about funding for specialist areas of the humanities,” Black says. “This year, for the first time in Soas’ history, the government will no longer directly fund the teaching of languages such as Urdu and Indonesian. If universities are left to rely solely on student demand – which is the trend – then these vital specialist areas are most vulnerable.”

Middlesex and Soas are not alone: many humanities and social science departments have faced the chop in recent years. Northumbria University is set to close its combined French and Spanish degree, and Ulster University is closing its languages department in response to budget cuts. The University of Nottingham stopped offering its creative writing BA earlier this year, citing “changing patterns of recruitment and staffing” and the University of Surrey dramatically downsized its politics department this year – laying off many staff in the process.

But others are keen to highlight the fact that it isn’t just the humanities that are under threat. The professional organisation for university leaders, Universities UK, says there are pressures “across all areas, not just in the humanities and social sciences”.

Mark Pendleton, a Japanese studies lecturer who is currently based in Japan, says the country’s response to the government’s move offers cause for optimism.

“What’s happened in Japan is no doubt worrying, but there’s been a widespread backlash, with mass discussion about what the humanities and social sciences do provide for society,” he says. “The Abe government has quickly become unpopular, and these reforms are a reason why. That’s heartening.”

Join the higher education network for more comment, analysis and job opportunities, direct to your inbox. Follow us on Twitter @gdnhighered.

