Seizing the Day: Scholars and University Culture

Professor Kono is a Southeast Asia area studies scholar who focuses on agriculture. He also travels around the globe, playing a leading role in Kyoto University’s international strategy. What do these perspectives bring to the table?

Diversity in Research

Worldwide, it has become harder for scholars to just engage in research as they like. The UK, for example, has established standards for universities with the Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the Concordat to Support Research Integrity. Also, early career researchers in Europe have created Eurodoc, taking the initiative to think about the likes of hiring and research funding.

Kono: Standardization and frameworks look good from the outside. But these alone won’t create changes on the inside. Consider environmental conservation. One shouldn’t infringe on the rights of locals or put them at a disadvantage. Conservation groups have drawn up philosophical and action principles for this. However, problems arise when applying them to specific cases because outside intervention benefits some people and harms others. Frameworks just allow them to justify their activities using standardized records.

Yet, looking at Japan, almost no one is working to ensure the quality of university research environments. Kyoto University advocates a free academic style, but sometimes it appears that freedom and diversity are in danger. If we just wait for the government to act for us, universities and scholars might end up entirely subservient.

Kono: That does happen. People on the outside shouldn’t be the ones creating such programs and opportunities.

The diversity of scholars is concerning. Universities have become more fluid (less tenure, more people from outside Japanese academia), which has led to less diversity—people don’t try their hand at a variety of things. Early career scholars say that they don’t talk with anyone throughout the day, don’t have a career role model, and don’t want to go anywhere.

Kono: One big reason is the emphasis on publishing articles. When I was around thirty years old, there were multiple people my age researching agriculture and rural livelihoods in Southeast Asia. I’m the only one left. I was able to produce a few more articles, but other people’s research had more breadth. If only people doing narrow research survive, things will become incredibly specialized and just taper out in the next generation.

As time passes, people develop different ideas about what makes a good scholar. Today, there’s a narrow neoliberal emphasis on performance. Early career scholars are working as hard as they can to produce books and articles while putting off the research they want to do until after tenure.

Kono: As someone in a management position, I must say that the emphasis on publishing articles isn’t going away. Insofar as one is a scholar at a university, one needs to keep on writing. While the hurdle to do so is perhaps becoming higher and higher, this is non-negotiable. With that said, I hope that those who pass this hurdle will have wide perspectives and diverse interests.

Work with Different People

How can one go beyond just writing articles to develop new research?

Kono: Try working with completely different people, people with different fields and interests. This goes for anything, whether it’s developing new research or applications for funding such research. It’s challenging, but your perspective will dramatically expand and new things will become apparent. 1+1 will equal 3 or 5. Try writing funding applications with people in different fields. For this, you must think academically, and you also must appeal to society—you won’t receive funding without doing so. It’s a great opportunity to think hard with others.
A lot of people stick with people who are in similar fields or heading in a similar research direction. However, in this case, 1+1 only becomes 1.3. It’s unquestionably harmful to eliminate differences, as is often done. I think highly of people who are thinking about things that I don’t, who can do things that I can’t. This is only rational.

People might be afraid or feel threatened.

Kono: It’s not threatening. I can learn a lot by working with someone in philosophy because I don’t know anything about it. Conversely, they won’t know anything about Southeast Asia or agriculture. So I think there’s no problem here. With that said, it is probably hard to find common ground.

Germinable Ideas and Keeping an Eye Out for Opportunities

How can people find common ground and work with completely different people?

Kono: Encounters and common ground come about by chance. However, one has to have ideas: “I want to do this kind of thing.” When you happen to meet someone, you’ll be able to think about connecting these ideas with theirs. If you don’t have anything, you’ll miss your chance.
Also, don’t be picky about people. It’s a waste to think about how someone doesn’t sit right with you—there might be a great opportunity around the corner! Try to look at the other person’s strengths. Also, if you trust someone because you like them, you’ll probably get into hot water.

What about confidence? Without it, you can’t take a step forward.

Kono: Everyone’s sizing up each other, which can be intimidating. But remember that everyone starts with no confidence and then acquires it gradually by succeeding. Then they’re able to take a step forward and say, “Hey, this is what I do. What about you?”

Diving into Opportunities and University Culture

At Kyoto University and elsewhere, more and more people with experience overseas want to connect researchers from different universities to gather information and do new things. It appears that such people sometimes are uncomfortable with Kyoto University’s lack of cross-pollination.

Kono: Whether it’s research or industry-academic collaboration, in Europe people quickly form communities. In the US, they don’t, but they help each other. At Kyoto University, people do neither. They think it’s important to have their freedom and try to become the ruler of their own ivory tower turret. However, KU’s culture is changing. People are coming together to pool their wisdom. Technology has accelerated this. Personally, I think it’s necessary to change oneself while maintaining what’s good about KU’s traditional academic culture.

While they might be doing what they like, it appears that few scholars can afford to, as you say, wait for opportunities to appear by chance.

Kono: I think it was the Bugis people in Indonesia—there’s always someone wandering around looking for a sweet, sure-fire opportunity. In short, what’s important is the drive to find interesting stuff. It’s the case for me as well. I have no idea what I’m doing tomorrow: I don’t know what’s going to come my way. However, back in the day, everyone around me was serious, only looking straight ahead.

There aren’t many people with that mindset at our university. With that said, it’d be strange to try to institutionalize such interesting opportunities. This actually reminds of my research on hunter-gatherer people. They don’t worry about tomorrow. They think that nature will give them something, that even if they can’t get something themself, another person will divide up what they get. A deep trust in nature and community members makes it possible to live without constantly having to prepare for tomorrow. If people believed that other scholars will help them if they fail, then their research might change.

Kono: University culture can play a role by affirming this kind of spirit and researchers who are different. I think it’s important for people to give this kind of thing its due recognition—even if such efforts end up being fruitless.