I've a feeling I've seen similar findings for Europe. But I could be wrong. The data for working this out should be here anyway. If you wanted to go digging.

www.timeuse.org

It contains chapters covering anti-austerity struggles 2008-13, water charges, repeal, housing struggles, trade unions, the centre left, anarchism, Trotskyism and republicanism.

Huge thanks to everyone who has helped out with this project!

The book includes writing from Dave Gibney, Aileen, Máire Ni Chuagáin, Juliana Sassi, Seamus Farrell, Rosi Leonard, Aisling Hedderman, Mary Muldowney, Paul Dillon, Kevin Doyle, Dan Finn, Stewart Reddin and Damian Lawlor.

I doubt that's it, as any lay person can perform a baptism. This is only supposed to happen when clergy are unable to perform a baptism (ex. if an unbaptised child is close to death). But, regardless, it's already accepted that lay people can perform a sacrament.

Oh that's very interesting. I'd never even heard of a Department of Campus Life before. That sounds bizarre!

I think what really drives innovation is competition over cost, where firms are compelled to find ways of increasing productivity per hour worked. And I think looking at that is where you are more likely to find explanations for slow down in productivity growth.

And that aligns with what universities, including the economists and academics advising policy makers want: more money for their institutions. Happy economists.

But was the evidence really there that investing in universities leads to higher innovation? I think the evidence was really fairly weak.

There's a large consensus amongst economists that what drives growth is "innovation"/TFP not capital deepening. So, how do you increase "innovation"? Well, an easy answer for policy makers is "invest in universities". Box ticked. Happy policy makers.

On the productivity growth story... I don't really believe the idea that there ever was a simple causal link where increased university research lead to increased productivity growth. I'd like if that story was true, but I think its a simple story that serves a neat coincidence of wants:

I really think, relative to the things I've listed above, almost no-one is employed in "improving the “student experience”". And in all the flurry of literature around this, the stats I've seen have always been these aggregated stats that don't really show what they claim to be showing.

Now, some of that is also going to be picked up in this "other professionals" category, but I suspect the growth in this category is to a large degree the growth is part-time faculty. Some of the growth is going to be things like a growth in medical services on campus. But apart from that....

I suspect a lot of the growth in the admin staff faculty is growth in things like IT services, and in STEM, where you have a large growth in non-academic lab technicians employed in universities etc, and growth in staffing in things like fundraising and alumni relations etc.

So, on the administration story. You often see figures like this that show a growth in staff focused "more on improving the “student experience”". Now, I've only worked in European universities, so maybe its different over the pond, but I don't really see this on the ground in Europe.

Well, when I say "I think the thread is wrong", I mean more "I suspect its wrong" than "I am sure its wrong". But, I suspect there are two things wrong. Firstly, on the university administration story, and secondly on the productivity growth story.

I assume NWW=North, Wallis and Weingast. Is that right?