Decía el pensador José Ortega y Gasset, en su obra Misión de la Universidad (1930), que:

“La universidad no tiene otro sentido que servir al progreso de la humanidad.”

Casi un siglo después, posiblemente no haya una forma más simple ni más profunda de definir el propósito último de la universidad: su auténtica razón de ser, su para qué.

A lo largo del tiempo, el modo en que la universidad ha servido a ese fin ha ido cambiando según el contexto, su alcance y sus capacidades —en lo que podríamos llamar la ampliación de sus misiones—.

Pero su esencia no varía: las universidades son progreso; si no lo son, dejan de serlo.

Hoy las universidades enfrentan el mayor conjunto de retos de toda su historia: la irrupción de la inteligencia artificial, la transformación de las vidas profesionales, la necesidad de internacionalizarse, las crecientes exigencias regulatorias, la competencia global y la sostenibilidad financiera, … entre muchos otros.

Todos ellos comparten un denominador común: un cambio vertiginoso, que incluso pone en cuestión el papel mismo de la universidad. Muchos de estos desafíos se abordan desde una lógica de supervivencia institucional, lo cual es legítimo: una universidad que no crea su futuro no puede cumplir su propósito.

Pero lo que resulta indudable es que la universidad se enfrenta hoy a la urgencia de repensarse.

La cuestión no es solo qué respuestas ofrecer ante los retos y los cambios necesarios, sino cómo darlas, asegurando que esas respuestas mantengan coherencia con su propósito.

Y este desafío no concierne solo a los líderes académicos. Incluye también a todos quienes, desde lo público o lo privado, condicionan y orientan el marco de acción de las universidades.

Las universidades siempre han sido importantes, pero hoy, en la era del conocimiento y la economía de la innovación, su papel es absolutamente capital.

No podemos pensar en ellas solo como instituciones académicas, sino como auténticas infraestructuras estratégicas: motores fundamentales del desarrollo económico y social de sus territorios. Tal como sucede ya de forma evidente y probada en regiones del mundo que se orientan bajo esta visión.

Pero ese desarrollo no puede medirse únicamente en crecimiento o competitividad.

Las universidades están llamadas también a contribuir activamente a la construcción de sociedades más justas, inclusivas y sostenibles, capaces de integrar el progreso económico con la equidad social, el respeto al medio ambiente y la cohesión cultural.

Repensar las universidades y su respuesta a los desafíos conectando con el propósito no es un gesto filosófico, sino una necesidad pragmática.

El propósito orienta las decisiones, da coherencia a los cambios y permite que la innovación institucional tenga sentido —que no sea un ejercicio estético o reactivo, sino una transformación con dirección. Algunos ejemplos:

Que la inteligencia artificial no sea vista como una amenaza a los métodos académicos tradicionales, sino como el nuevo entorno en el que debemos preparar a las personas: para aprender mejor, adaptarse y prosperar en un mundo en transformación constante. Personas equipadas con mejores competencias, autonomía de pensamiento y sentido crítico.

Ni la internacionalización como una mera estrategia de captación de estudiantes o mejora de reputación, sino como una responsabilidad en la formación de ciudadanos globales y en la atracción de talento que contribuya al progreso colectivo.

Ni la investigación como un camino hacia los rankings o la mera supervivencia académica, sino como el vehículo de las ideas que transforman el mundo y nuestra forma de comprenderlo.

Además, cuando una universidad deja de cumplir su propósito, otros ocuparán su lugar produciendo disrupción, y no siempre con los mismos valores ni con el mismo compromiso con el bien común.

Como advirtió Derek Bok, expresidente de Harvard, “si las universidades no son vistas como al servicio de la sociedad, con el tiempo la sociedad dejará de apoyarlas.”

El cumplimiento de su propósito es lo que da legitimidad a las universidades. Y por eso, el propósito puede y debe medirse: no en indicadores de volumen, sino en indicadores de valor. No mostrando solo lo que las universidades producen como outputs, sino el impacto real que generan en su territorio, de acuerdo con su contexto particular.

Y diferenciando lo que constituye inversión de futuro y no solo gasto. Todo lo que hoy se sacrifica puede convertirse en una factura que la sociedad pagará en el futuro.

Finalmente, ese propósito también fortalece el sentido de vida de todos aquellos que, de una forma u otra, formamos parte de la educación superior.

Porque es la universitas —la comunidad de personas que la conforman: profesores, investigadores, estudiantes y alumni—, y no las estructuras ni las tecnologías, la que crea y mantiene vivo el propósito de la universidad como fuerza para el progreso humano.

Una universidad con propósito no solo transforma el mundo: transforma a las personas que la hacen posible.

“El propósito de la universidad no cambia: cambia el mundo, y la universidad se adapta para seguir haciéndolo avanzar.”

Una reflexión abierta…

¿Qué pasaría si las universidades midieran su éxito no solo por sus logros académicos, sino por la huella que dejan en las personas, los territorios y el futuro? ¿Y si el propósito se convirtiera en un nuevo indicador global de calidad universitaria?

This question may sound provocative, but it is necessary.

Every transformation begins by reframing the question. Einstein noted that “it is theory that decides what we can observe,” and Heisenberg added that “what we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.” Perhaps it is time to change the paradigm through which we look at universities and the questions we ask about them.

Traditionally, we have understood universities as academic institutions devoted to teaching, research, and human capital formation. They are that, and more.They widen equitable access to professional careers, enrich cultural life, and cultivate better-prepared citizens. Expanding access to higher education is a social achievement.

None of this is to deny their nature; rather, it is to recognize that, regardless of their institutional status, universities create value not for themselves but for society (with transformative impacts). That is why we should broaden our perspective: the shift carries profound economic, political, and social implications.

Overwhelming Evidence

A growing body of work (across countries, regions, and cities) points in the same direction: where universities are strong, economies are more innovative, productive, and resilient.

• Valero & Van Reenen (2019): about 15,000 universities across 1,500 regions in 78 countries. A 10% rise in university presence is linked to 0.4% higher GDP per capita (up to 0.7% in advanced economies). In the UK, Valero & Van Reenen (2016) estimate that opening one additional university is associated with 0.7% higher national income at a cost of 0.1% of GDP, with especially large gains in lagging regions. Complementing this, Marrocu, Paci & Usai (2022) show sizable long-run TFP gains from universities across Europe, transmitted through human and technological capital and distance-decaying spillovers, robust to institutional and agglomeration controls. At the urban scale, Peng & Xu (2024), using a panel of 239 cities, document that stronger university embeddedness in strategic city sectors boosts patenting, firm creation, and diversification.

• HIVE Report (2025): across 78 global education-and-innovation hubs, higher-education and research capacity are pre-existing, necessary conditions for innovation-economy emergence and scaling; author’s calculations (Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE), CB Insights, Startup Genome) show that 82% of the world’s unicorns and 77% of total innovation-ecosystem value cluster in regions hosting THE Top 100 universities.

In many countries and regions, universities already operate as large, mature industries. They generate direct, indirect, and induced economic value; in many cases, international education is a leading export; and they sustain substantial employment (most notably in the UK, Australia, and Canada). Yet treating them as “national industries” on these grounds alone understates their systemic and structural role. A strategic industry is more than a source of income; it must meet additional requirements.

A sector is strategic when it exhibits strong inter-industry linkages; high innovation capacity and the production of transferable knowledge; a direct bearing on national autonomy and economic and technological security; the ability to sustain employment, value added, and structural transformation; and dynamic comparative advantages with credible integration into global value chains, alongside resilience to economic shocks and the capacity to reinvest and learn over time.

Seen in this light, universities not only meet these criteria; they often set the benchmark, though only under certain conditions. This reframes the conversation, with implications at three levels: (1) national and regional policy, (2) the new geoeconomy, and (3) universities themselves.

1. National and Regional Policies: From Expenditure to Strategic Investment

Recognizing universities as strategic industries completely changes how we act. They are no longer a budget line to be trimmed, but a strategic investment (enabled by public policy and public–private co-investment) in productivity, innovation, and social resilience.

As economist Mariana Mazzucato reminds us, the results of basic research are often long-term and frequently leveraged by the private sector. That is not a flaw; it is the engine of the innovation cycle. Between ideas and application, there is always a bridge (entrepreneurship), but the ultimate origin of knowledge must never be forgotten. Who could have imagined that a Stanford PhD dissertation would plant the seed of Google, one of the most influential companies of recent decades and a pillar of U.S. leadership in the digital economy?

Universities and research centers, through basic research, prospect for and discover ore deposits that, through applied research and development (in partnership with industry), are cut and polished into diamonds. From the internet to artificial intelligence to the mRNA vaccines that helped curb COVID-19, none would exist without basic research. The riskiest stage is exploration (far riskier than later stages of transformation), yet it is fundamental.

When a country treats its universities as a strategic industry, its entire logic of action changes: educational policy aligns with industrial policy, innovation becomes a state priority, and regional development shifts from assistance-based to productive. Above all, a shared narrative and a long-term vision emerge. Some nations have already made this transition: Singapore anchors its RIE2025 in the university system, with NUS and NTU leading national missions in AI, sustainability, and biotechnology; Germany embeds universities in its High-Tech Strategy 2025; China advances Double First-Class, turning universities into nodes of scientific sovereignty.

2. A New Geography of Growth

For decades, the United States built technological supremacy on the strength of its universities and research centers, attracting global talent. Today, China is replicating that strategy at speed. As Phil Baty (Times Higher Education) recently argued at the World Economic Forum, we are witnessing a major shift in the geopolitics of knowledge and innovation.

A geoeconomy of knowledge is emerging: power is exercised not through territory but through networks of talent, research, and innovation. In this context, the ability to generate, attract, and retain knowledge is no longer merely a matter of competitiveness; it is a matter of strategic autonomy. If the industrial centers of the 19th century arose where coal and steel were found, the centers of the 21st century flourish where talent, research, and innovation converge (with universities as anchor and driving force).

From Silicon Valley and Boston to London’s Golden Triangle, Beijing, the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area, New York, the Toronto–Waterloo corridor, Singapore, Sydney, and Berlin, leading hubs share the same DNA: a powerful (or rapidly rising) higher-education and research base.

This also opens opportunities for regions whose potential was previously constrained by a weak industrial base or limited natural resources. Investing in talent, knowledge, and innovation (through smart specialization, enabling conditions, articulation and connections with other education-and-innovation hubs, and coalitions grounded in a shared vision) creates opportunities for many regions.

3. Universities: Impacts Beyond Missions

Asking whether universities should be the strategic industries of the 21st century is not an act of self-congratulation. It is a call for greater responsibility and ambition, for universities to rethink their role, their purpose, and their model of governance. Fulfilling the missions of teaching and research, or even the so-called “third mission,” is no longer enough.

Most importantly, impact is not automatic; it emerges when universities and regions align talent, research-to-market, infrastructure and placemaking, entrepreneurship and capital, and governance around a shared cluster strategy (Parilla & Haskins, 2023, Brookings Metro).

The language should shift from defending missions to pursuing and demonstrating impacts (as Michael M. Crow, Arizona State University, has long argued in the “New American University” framework). That, in turn, calls for a new evaluation approach beyond rankings or academic metrics, to measure employment, innovation (output and adoption), social cohesion, and quality of life, in context.

Yet this remains uncommon: universities’ scorecards still rely heavily on academic results, research outputs, and reputation rather than real-world impacts, and policymakers often overlook transformational action and long-term regional effects. The aim is to complement, not replace, traditional metrics with verifiable impacts that capture what universities actually change in the economy and society, in their specific context and territory.

A Long-Term Vision

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is often credited with saying: “If you want to build a great city, create a great university and wait 200 years.” He was right. Universities are the architecture of progress: every student, every research project, every idea planted today will transform the society of tomorrow. But we no longer have centuries (or even decades), because the pace of change has surpassed our capacity to adapt.

Reimagining universities as strategic industries is not rhetorical flourish. It is, returning to Einstein and Heisenberg, about changing the paradigm through which we perceive value, progress, and development in the 21st century. In the new geoeconomy of knowledge, universities are not peripheral institutions; they are the infrastructure of the future, shaping how nations create prosperity, autonomy, and shared progress.

This shift has operational implications: considering universities as strategic industries realigns three lenses at once: policy (from expenditure to strategic investment), economic development (within a new geography of growth driven by talent and research), and university governance (strategy, narrative, and performance evaluated by impacts, not just mission fulfillment, while remaining true to their ultimate purpose).

If universities exist to serve human progress, what is the one change you would prioritize—starting with purpose—to let them act as strategic industries?