The Meaning of Contribution

By: Prof. Ema Utami (Director of the Institute for Research and Community Service, Universitas Amikom Yogyakarta) REPUBLIKA.CO.ID, “Diktisaintek” has become a new buzzword in government policy regarding higher education, science, and technology, introduced to mark the direction of Indonesia’s human resource development. It is a vision that affirms that higher education, research, and innovation should no longer simply produce academic output, but must leave a tangible impact on the public sphere and the wider community. This buzzword conveys the message that every academic activity, research, and technological application should not stop at theoretical achievement, but must directly contribute to the welfare, independence, and competitiveness of the nation. Science is expected to be a force for change and leave a tangible impact on the public sphere and the wider community. In this context, discussions about state scholarships have regained their relevance. Programmes such as the Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) – which was designed from the outset as a means of financing studies and as a strategic instrument for producing outstanding human resources – are certainly expected to have an impact on Indonesia. This fund, managed by the state and sourced from the public, embodies the collective hope that each scholarship recipient will not only be able to complete their higher education at the best universities, but will also bring back knowledge, networks, and new perspectives to strengthen national development. However, the phrase “having an impact,” which the government promotes through this buzzword, has now become a point of questioning in the public sphere. The debate on social media regarding the attitudes and life choices of some LPDP scholarship recipients has sparked a more fundamental discussion about the meaning of contribution. Is “having an impact” simply understood as physical return and fulfilment of contractual obligations? Or does it demand something more substantial in the form of the presence of ideas, works, and genuine commitment to national issues? This is where the policy buzzword meets social reality, between the vision set by the state and the public’s expectations of those who receive scholarships. The cases that have emerged recently show how the debate about the meaning of “having an impact” has taken concrete form. Several LPDP scholarship recipients have come under scrutiny for being considered to have failed to fulfil their commitment to service, and some have even been seen as having attitudes that contradict the spirit of nationalism. This polemic reveals the tension between collective expectations and personal choices. On the one hand, the public wants to see tangible contributions through return and work in the country. On the other hand, there is a view that contributions can be made in the form of ideas, works, or international networks that still benefit Indonesia, even if carried out from abroad. Thus, the issue of LPDP is no longer just a matter of administrative compliance, but has evolved into a broader debate about the moral and social responsibility of scholarship recipients to the community that has placed great trust in them. From a clearer perspective, the polemic about the contributions of LPDP scholarship recipients is not an isolated case. It is a reflection of a broader public concern about the direction of Indonesia’s human development. This is where the word “impact” acquires its ethical weight, which is no longer just an indicator of performance, but becomes a measure of the presence of an educated person in their community. As in the world of higher education, when lecturers are measured today by their SINTA (Science and Technology Index) score as a representation of scientific productivity, we can also question to what extent these figures and indices actually have a real impact on the wider community. Index-based and quantitative parameter measurements are indeed important for maintaining standards and accountability. However, this can also leave a gap between administrative achievements and substantive meaning. The buzzword “having an impact” cannot be fully answered by figures, contracts, or performance reports, but rather demands an inner awareness that knowledge is a trust that always entails responsibility. In the context of state scholarships, contribution is not only a legal obligation, but also a moral calling to ensure that the opportunity received truly benefits everyone. Therefore, the polemic about LPDP scholarships should not stop at a momentary debate in the digital sphere. This polemic can be a moment of collective reflection on how this nation values investment in education and how educated people value the trust placed in them. The government, scholarship-granting institutions, universities, and the public need to work together to formulate indicators that measure not only academic output or physical presence, but also assess real contributions to social welfare. At the same time, scholarship recipients are reminded that the opportunity they receive is a trust that demands moral and professional responsibility, and that contributions can take various forms, but the intention to benefit the country must be real and measurable. The Quran in Surah An-Nisa, verse 58, reminds us, “Indeed, Allah commands you to return deposits to their owners and to judge between people with justice. Indeed, Allah is ever aware of what you do.” And Allah knows best.