University should reallocate institute's resources to students

Harvard's decision to dissolve the Harvard Institute for International Development (HIID), following the advice of a University task force report that summed up a six-month-long review, was the correct one. The administration can now redirect the resources and staff of HIID toward benefiting the students of Harvard University.

HIID grew out of the work of Harvard's Development Advisory Service (1962-1974), and earlier projects involving Harvard advisors in international development. The institute itself was created in 1974 to coordinate Harvard's program for assistance, training, and research in the developing world. The institute had 20 overseas offices and 25 more international programs headquartered in Cambridge and an annual budget of over $34 million--more than some of Harvard's graduate schools. Unwieldy and hard to manage, HIID had been tarnished in recent years by allegations of scandal and corruption in Russia.

HIID got into trouble when, in May 1997, the U.S. government cancelled a $57 million grant to HIID in Russia, headed by Professor of Economics Andre Shleifer '82, and the U.S. Attorney's office began an investigation into allegations that HIID invested in Russian securities while advising the Russian government on economic policy. The investigation is ongoing.

These actions have embarrassed Harvard and demonstrate that these programs should be under the more direct control of educational sectors of the University.

Furthermore, most HIID staff do research but do not pass it on to students, graduate or undergraduate, and therefore do not contribute directly to the education of Harvard students. International consulting may have been hard to come by 40 years ago; today, these projects, in and of themselves, do not serve Harvard's best interest.

If certain projects fit within the overall advocacy, research and educational goals of Harvard's graduate schools, those segments of HIID will have a smooth transfer, as Provost Harvey V. Fineberg '67 has promised. Other groups will be disbanded completely, and the University similarly has shown concern that this process will be supervised responsibly.

Now that Harvard has disbanded its advisory institute, the University will have to formulate some new policies about its employees and consulting. In doing so, we urge Harvard to remember it must be an educational and research facility, first and foremost, and require all members of the Faculty to make time to teach students.

We look forward to the reallocation of resources and staff from HIID to the students of the College and the University' graduate schools. The University's decision to follow the report and disband HIID can only be beneficial.