Inside Higher Ed recently had a piece about a new study done by the Rockefeller Institute of Government that purports to find a “new paradigm” for the role of higher education in promoting state and regional economic development.

I haven’t yet read the study, but a glance at IHE’s summary makes me think that it’s much ado about nothing.

First, higher ed has a role to play in innovation. Of course, but keep in mind that very few profs are engaged in work that’s even remotely connected to innovation in goods, services, and processes. Moreover, since knowledge knows no borders, the location of schools is irrelevant. If something useful is developed at, say, NC State, it will soon benefit businesses and consumers everywhere. Putting a campus in some economically depressed area won’t energize a stagnant regional economy through innovations.

Second, higher ed can help employers — for example, in worker training and management consulting. The free market already has plenty of options for companies looking for assistance in those areas. Why do they need to turn to universities?

Third, community development. Schools can “develop and manage property in a number of roles.” Okay, but why are nonprofit institutions better at managing property than are individuals and firms that operate under the profit motive?

Fourth, an educated population. Supposedly, “the new economy is making the traditional academic mission ever more important.” But most of the economy is not “new,” and there are few jobs that cannot be done by an intelligent and motivated individual who hasn’t taken and mastered college courses in math, science, finance, and so on. Moreover, since the U.S. already has a glut of college grads doing fairly low-skill jobs, we need to doubt the hype about college being ever more important.