Government Plans to Close Irrelevant Study Programmes, Experts Highlight Risks
The government’s plan to close several study programmes (prodi) considered irrelevant to economic needs has sparked debate. On one hand, this step is seen as essential to align the world of education with changes in the job market, but on the other, concerns arise regarding the policy direction and its risks to higher education institutions.
The Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology, through Secretary General Badri Munir Sukoco, stated that this policy requires collective support, including from universities. He hopes for “willingness” from higher education institutions if their programmes must be closed to adjust to future needs.
“So, in our view at the ministry, a joint policy is needed. We also hope for support from friends in PTPK, of course, all the rectors here, (so that) there is willingness,” said Badri at the National Population Symposium 2026, quoted from the replay on the Ministry of Population and Family Planning/BKKBN YouTube channel.
Nevertheless, the plan has immediately drawn scrutiny from education observers. Education practitioner from Vox Populi Institute Indonesia, Indra Charismiadji, believes that aligning the campus world with industry needs is inevitable, especially amid global job disruptions.
He refers to various international studies showing major changes in the labour market, where many types of jobs disappear and are replaced by technology. However, Indra questions the basis for closing these programmes. He assesses that to date, no transparent criteria have been seen regarding which programmes are deemed fit to close.
“Is there an open academic study to determine which programmes must be closed?” he said, quoted from detikedu, Monday (27/4/2026).
If there is no clear basis, he fears that decisions will be determined by short-term bureaucratic considerations, not long-term needs. In addition, Indra highlights the potential for unhealthy competition among universities, especially in vying for new students if the number of programmes becomes more limited.
He reminds of the importance of a talent roadmap towards 2045 as the main reference. Without a clear direction, he says, closing programmes could be a premature step.
“Closing programmes without knowing what industries will be built in the future is like cutting down trees without a plan to replant,” he said.
Indra also highlights the classic issue of supply and demand for graduates. He gives the example of fields like marine biology, which actually have potential in Indonesia, but have low absorption because the supporting industry ecosystem has not yet developed.
Indra said that many programmes become irrelevant not because the knowledge is unimportant, but because the supporting industries have not been built seriously. On the other hand, he reminds that universities should not be perceived merely as producers of labour.
“Campuses are not labour factories, but places for developing knowledge and innovation,” he stressed.
He also urges the government to focus more on curriculum reforms aligned with the Society 5.0 concept, where technology serves as a tool, while humans are at the centre of innovation.