Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy E-Book

Sjur Bergan

• Herausgeber: Council of Europe
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020

Seitenzahl: 532

Beschreibung

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are essential for universities to produce the research and teaching necessary to improve society and the human condition. Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are increasingly important components of the development of democracy. At the same time, these fundamental democratic values are subject to pressure in many countries. The relationship between academic freedom, institutional autonomy and democracy is fundamental: it is barely conceivable that they could exist in a society not based on democratic principles, and democracy is enriched when higher education institutions operate on this basis. Higher education institutions need to be imbued with democratic culture and that, in turn, helps to promote democratic values in the wider society. None of these issues are simple and the lines between legitimacy and illegitimacy are sometimes hard to discern, as is illustrated by perspectives from Europe, North America, Asia, Australia and the Mediterranean region.

Leseprobe

ACADEMIC FREEDOM, INSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY AND THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY

Sjur Bergan, Tony Gallagher and Ira Harkavy (eds)

Council of Europe Higher Education Series No. 24

The opinions expressed in this work are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Council of Europe.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated, reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic (CD-Rom, internet, etc.) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the Directorate of Communication (F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex or [email protected]).

Cover design: Documents and Publications Production Department (SPDP), Council of EuropePhotos: Istock Layout: Jouve, Paris

Council of Europe Publishing F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex http://book.coe.int

ISBN (epub) 978-92-871-9037-6©Council of Europe, April 2020Printed at the Council of Europe

Contents

Preface

A word from the editors

Setting the scene

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the engaged university

Academic freedom, university autonomy and democracy’s future in Europe

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy – What role in and for the EHEA?

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy: regional overviews

Democracy and the purposes of higher education in the United States

Academic and scholarly freedom: towards a “disputing” university with critically engaged students

Perspectives on institutional autonomy in a European higher education context

Curbing university autonomy and academic freedom in the name of quality assurance, accountability and internationalisation in East Asia

Academic freedom in the European Union: legalities and realities

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy: views from public authorities

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and democracy: a view from the United States

Institutional autonomy and academic freedom: the complex role of public authorities

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy: a view from UNESCO

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy: examples and challenges

21st-century challenges to institutional autonomy and the public good: an American perspective

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy: examples and challenges

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy: where do we go from here?

University autonomy and academic freedom revisited

“Freedom to err” as a beacon for public policies on higher education and research

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy: a view from teaching professionals

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy: suggestions for action

Reflections on the Global Forum and suggestions for action

Declaration adopted by the Global Forum

Editors

Contributors

List of tables

Perspectives on institutional autonomy in a European higher education context

Table 1: Impacts of national higher education governance approaches on selected institutional autonomy aspects

Table 2: Autonomy ranking of 29 European higher education systems based on the EUA 2017 Scorecard (Pruvot and Estermann 2017)

Curbing university autonomy and academic freedom in the name of quality assurance, accountability and internationalisation in East Asia

Table 1. Developmental states in East Asia and neoliberal governance model

Table 2. University–state relations in East Asia

Academic freedom in the European Union: legalities and realities

Table 1. Constitutional protection of freedom of speech and academic freedom

Table 2: Legislative protection for freedom of teaching and research

Table 3: Level of protection for academic freedom in respondents’ higher education institutions

Table 4: Changes in the protection of academic freedom in recent years

Table 5: Individual academic freedom for teaching has declined in my institution in recent years

Table 6: Individual academic freedom for research has declined in my institution in recent years

Table 7: Institutional autonomy has declined in my institution in recent years

Table 8: Self-governance has declined in my institution in recent years

Table 9: Employment protection for academic staff in my institution has declined in recent years

Table 10: Summary table

Table 11: Does the university in which you work have an official policy document on academic freedom?

Table 12: I would welcome additional information on the constitutional/legislative protection of academic freedom in my nation

Table 13: Because of your academic views have you been subjected to bullying by academic colleagues?

Table 14: Because of your academic views have you been subjected to psychological pressure by someone in your institution?

Table 15: Because of your academic views have you ever practised self-censorship?

Preface

As Director General of Democracy, I am proud to present this book on academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy.

The topic is at the very heart of the concerns of the Council of Europe. Democracy, human rights and the rule of law cannot become and remain a reality unless higher education institutions, and staff and students, enjoy academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Conversely, we cannot have genuine democracy unless the higher education and research community is able to enquire freely.

The Council of Europe has already developed standard-setting instruments on the public responsibility for higher education and research (Recommendation Rec/CM(2007)6) and on the public responsibility for academic freedom and institutional autonomy (Recommendation Rec/CM(2012)7). Our Parliamentary Assembly has also adopted an important recommendation (Recommendation 1762 (2006) on academic freedom and institutional autonomy) and is now preparing another recommendation on the threats to these values.

The articles in this book look beyond the role of public authorities to the role of the academic community itself, as does the declaration adopted by the Global Forum. The book includes views from North America, Asia and Europe. This has been possible thanks to our long-standing co-operation with the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy, as well as the more recent inclusion of the Organization of American States and the International Association of Universities in this co-operation.

This is the 24th volume in our Higher Education Series since it was launched in late 2004. Together, these books consider key issues in European higher education policy and the contribution of higher education to the development of a culture of democracy. That we have published an average of one or two books every year for 15 years is no small achievement. It shows also our strong commitment to safeguarding and realising genuine democracy.

I am grateful to the authors who made this book possible and to its three co-editors, Ira Harkavy, Tony Gallagher and my colleague Sjur Bergan, who initiated our Higher Education Series and has been series editor since the beginning.

I wish you much pleasure and food for thought in reading this important book.

Snežana Samardžić-MarkovićDirector General of DemocracyCouncil of Europe

A word from the editors

Sjur Bergan, Tony Gallagher and Ira Harkavy

This book arises from discussion and debate at the Global Forum on Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy and the Future of Democracy, held in Strasbourg in June 2019, which gathered participants not only from Europe and the United States but also from other parts of the world. The fact that concerns about academic freedom and institutional autonomy are global is reflected in the book.

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are becoming increasingly important components of how democracy develops and how it should develop, not least because of the growing international pressure to which these fundamental democratic values are subject in many countries. The forum gathered some 130 higher education leaders, policy makers with public authorities and representatives of NGOs, the largest number of whom were drawn from Europe and the United States, as well as smaller numbers from Australia, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. The global reach of the participants reflected the organisational diversity in the forum co-organised by the Council of Europe, the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy, the Organization of American States, and other partners, notably the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory.

We set ourselves the tasks of increasing our commitment to higher education’s contribution to developing and advancing a culture of democracy, and of building a better understanding of how academic freedom and institutional autonomy relate to the future of democracy. The conversations in Strasbourg are taken forward by the contributors to this book, all of whom presented at the forum.

Our work on the democratic mission of higher education and the co-operation between the Council of Europe and the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy dates back to 1999, with a project on the University as a Site of Citizenship (Plantan 2004). The Global Forum on Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy and the Future of Democracy that served as the occasion for this book, therefore, also marked the 20th anniversary of the transatlantic partnership.

This was the sixth Global Forum. In 2017 we gathered in Rome under the title “Higher Education for Diversity, Social Inclusion and Community: A Democratic Imperative”. Our concern then was the challenges to democracy arising from mistrust of democratic institutions, increasing political, educational and economic inequalities, alienation, and the rising intolerance and defiance of cultural diversity. We explored how higher education could play an essential role in building a culture of democracy by addressing all these challenges. We gathered in Belfast in 2014, where the conference theme was “Higher Education and Democratic Innovation”, and we committed to promote democracy, human rights and the rule of law, as well as intercultural dialogue, to promote social harmony and justice, and the belief in the key role of education in furthering these goals. As part of a series of events marking the 200th anniversary of the University of Oslo we gathered there from 27 to 29 June 2011 to explore the theme “Reimagining Democratic Societies: a New Era of Personal and Social Responsibility”. The first two global fora, both held at Council of Europe headquarters in Strasbourg, focused on “Converging Competences: Diversity, Higher Education and Sustainable Democracy” (2008) and “The Responsibility of Higher Education for a Democratic Culture” (the first forum, in 2006).1

As the Global Forum has grown, so too has the global reach of its participants, an issue we will address below. What also has changed is the level of threat to democratic culture generally, and to the position of higher education more specifically. The backdrop to the 2019 forum included unusually high levels of political volatility in many countries, marked in some by a collapse in support for traditional parties and in others by the sudden emergence of new political forces. The rise of new populist political forces was particularly important and of concern: these politicians often use emotion instead of reason, assertions instead of evidence, and evoke nativist rhetoric. Many display a disinterested relationship with concepts of “truth” and a tendency to dismiss the role of experts, especially when their expertise is not politically convenient. It is a disdain for science, knowledge and democracy itself that is of gravest concern to higher education, for knowledge and debate are the very stuff of higher education and belong to the very fabric of our institutions.

In the forum and in the contributions to this volume we set out the reasons why a focus on academic freedom and institutional autonomy is important. Our fundamental contention is that they are essential for universities to produce the research and teaching necessary to improve the human condition, which involves developing and maintaining a democratic society. They do this by raising the quality of research and teaching in higher education. This is so because, as is laid out in the values of the Magna Charta Universitatum,2 the work of higher education institutions has to be free of political interference and, at the same time, a place where dialogue and debate is encouraged, because it is not possible to advance knowledge if old orthodoxies and dogmas are immune to challenge. In practical terms we have seen examples of actions that, on the face of it, seem to provide just such challenges, through attempts to control or restrict the content or teaching or research programmes, or prevent controversial speakers from appearing on university campuses.

We further contend that the relationship between academic freedom, institutional autonomy and democracy is fundamental: it is barely conceivable that academic freedom and institutional autonomy could exist in a society not based on democratic principles, and equally we believe that democracy is enriched when higher education institutions operate on the basis of these principles. Thus, symbiosis is not just between the formal aspects of higher education institutions and democratic societies, but also part of the culture of both, that is the ideas, ideals and practices that enable them to function effectively. Democratic culture is the set of attitudes and behaviours that enable democratic institutions, procedures (typically, elections) and laws to function in practice.3 Higher education institutions are places that have to be imbued with democratic culture, and that, in turn, helps to promote democratic values in the wider society.

None of these issues are simple and the lines between legitimacy and illegitimacy are sometimes hard to discern. For example, while it is important that higher education institutions are places for dialogue and debate, places where people can and should be discomforted by controversial opinions, the normal legal constraints of freedom of expression – that people should be free from the threat of violence or harassment – should apply. But what about a situation where an extremist political group is deliberately trying to fuel controversy or provoke a reaction by courting controversy?

In the forum and this volume, we set out to extend our understanding of these issues, in their fullest dimensions, and to consider the frameworks we might use, or develop, as reference points to guide decisions and practice. We have, for example, quite a good framework for our discussions on the concept of institutional autonomy through the European University Association’s (EUA) University Autonomy Tool (Pruvot and Estermann 2017), which not only sets out a rationale for dimensions of autonomy, but also provides indicators and data on each of these. Useful as this is, however, it tends to focus on the more formal aspects of institutional autonomy. There are subjective elements to this as well, including issues related to culture, which may impact on the outworking of specific formal arrangements.

The concept of academic freedom is more problematic in that we do not yet have a clear definition of what it means, how it relates to freedom of expression, or how it relates to the civic responsibility of higher education to make a positive difference to society. Academics can enact different roles, as disciplinary experts, as public intellectuals or as normal citizens of society. Should they operate by different rules when they speak from the lectern in a classroom, or the university hall in a public meeting, or when writing an opinion piece in a popular newspaper? And should they be judged differently by their academic colleagues or their academic institution in each of these contexts? In Europe, work is now under way within the Bologna Follow-Up Group on identifying ways in which the degree of respect for academic freedom and institutional autonomy may be assessed,4 and similar thoughts have been expressed in discussions within the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, where a recommendation on threats to academic freedom and autonomy of universities in Europe is under preparation. It is hoped the recommendation will be adopted in June 2020.5

For some time, it was felt that these issues were of independent concern, that the issue of academic freedom was something that exercised higher education institutions in North America, while higher education institutions in Europe were much more engaged by the issue of institutional autonomy. In fact, both issues are related, and both are of concern across many more jurisdictions than these. This realisation has developed within the forum as the global reach of participation has widened. The challenges to democracy and the centrality of higher education to these issues are found in most, if not all, regions of the world, even if specific elements take on local inflections. Both of these themes are clear in the contributions to this volume: the broad problems and challenges are global, even if they take on local inflections in practice, but there remains significant value in engaging on these issues at a global level.

A further key partner in these considerations is public authorities and even here there are different models of practice evident in different global contexts, with public authorities in different contexts having a mix of economic, political and social priorities for higher education. The balance of these priorities has varying implications for the relationship between higher education institutions and public authorities with regard to academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Public authorities set the legislative framework within which higher education institutions operate, so they are crucial for the establishment of contexts that enable or constrain academic freedom and institutional autonomy. The Council of Europe has always recognised and championed the multiple purposes of higher education institutions, including the priority of preparing students to live as active citizens in democratic societies. The commitment to higher education as a public good also implies a commitment to a consciously positive impact on society, which can be realised in a variety of ways. All of them require engagement and negotiation between public authorities and higher education institutions to work through the approaches that seem best suited to identifying shared goals and contributing to the common good. This also requires consideration of formal mechanisms to govern the relationship between higher education institutions and public authorities so these wider goals can be achieved, a preparedness to address the indirect consequences of legislative and other frameworks that may unintentionally impact on academic freedom and institutional autonomy, and the willingness to articulate the shared values that will collectively help to underpin democratic culture.

These are ambitious goals, but they are immediate and pressing needs, given the increasing level of threat to democracy. In the best traditions of academic practice, we are seeking to establish conceptual and organisational frameworks through which we can generate data to inform our deliberations and use those data to better understand the consequences of our tasks. In the forum, and in this volume, we have organised the chapters in three broad ways. We have a number of regional overviews that explore the debates on academic freedom and institutional autonomy, and their local inflections, across different parts of the world. Our next section explores the role of public authorities, including contributions from Europe, the United States and UNESCO, to provide regional, national and transnational perspectives. The third and final part of the book presents a range of stakeholder perspectives through which the details of local practice can be discerned, as well as the full text of the Declaration on Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy and the Future of Democracy adopted by the participants in the Global Forum.

When academic communities flourish, they can make an enormously important and positive contribution to society, not least in helping to underpin the values and practices of democratic culture. We are all too aware of the type of gross challenges to democracy and higher education institutions that can and do exist, and we have plenty of frameworks to help guide us through these challenges, but further details of discovery and action remain to be uncovered and developed. The Global Forum, the declaration that emerged from it, and this volume of discussion, debate and evidence all add to the body of knowledge we have to work with and serve as a further commitment to secure academic freedom, institutional autonomy and democracy.

References

Plantan F. (2004), “The university as a site of citizenship”, in Bergan S. (ed.), The university as res publica, Council of Europe Publishing, Council of Europe higher education series no. 1, Strasbourg, pp. 83-128.

Pruvot E. B. and Estermann T. (2017), University Autonomy in Europe III (Two volumes: scorecard and country profiles), available at www.university-autonomy.eu/about/, accessed 3 October 2019.

1. An overview can be found at www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/forums, accessed 3 October 2019.

2. www.magna-charta.org/, accessed 3 October 2019.

3. For the concept of democratic culture, see the Council of Europe’s Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture, available at www.coe.int/en/web/education/competences-for-democratic-culture, accessed 3 October 2019.

4. One of the editors (Sjur Bergan) is a member of the small task force set up for this purpose.

5. The rapporteur is Mr Kolomon Brenner (Hungary), and the expert report is being prepared by Mr Terence Karran, who is among the authors of this volume. Two of us (Tony Gallagher and Sjur Bergan) participated in a discussion in the Assembly’s Committee on Culture, Science, Education and Media on 3 October 2019.

Setting the scene

Academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the engaged university

Sjur Bergan and Ira Harkavy6

Abstract

An ability to reflect and have a bit of distance is necessary for a university to fulfil its role as a venue to understand and help solve the larger problems that face humanity. This role of higher education cannot be fulfilled except in a context of democracy, both in society at large and within academia. Fulfilling this role, therefore, does not mean stepping out. The engaged university is an institution that fulfils its broader societal role as an independent institution, drawing on its research, teaching and institutional resources. It is neutral in the sense of being non-partisan, but it is far from neutral in the sense of being devoid of values or convictions. The chapter discusses the concept of the engaged university in relation to its democratic mission as well as in relation to academic freedom and institutional autonomy, which must include the freedom and autonomy to engage.

Keywords: engaged university; democratic mission; democratic culture; academic freedom; institutional autonomy.

The engaged university

An ability to reflect and have a bit of distance is perhaps necessary for a university to fulfil its role as a venue to understand and help solve the larger problems that face humanity. Addressing burning local, national and global issues, such as climate change, sustainable development, migration, poverty and increasing inequality, societal divides, rising extremism, and a democratic deficit, requires that higher education institutions, faculties and students have the freedom and the will to consider issues both in the short term and in a broader and longer-term perspective, as well as in relation to their values. This role of higher education cannot be fulfilled except in a context of democracy, both in society at large and within academia. Moreover, it cannot be fulfilled unless the university sees itself as an actor of democracy.

The ability to reflect and take a step back, therefore, does not mean stepping out. Universities and academics must be present in public debate and contribute to solving our most significant problems through research, teaching and informed engagement. In many cases, the contribution of the academic community will be one nobody else could make, providing an essential input and working with others to improve the quality of life.

An engaged university, therefore, is an institution that fulfils its broader societal role as an independent institution, drawing on its research, teaching and institutional resources. It is neutral in the sense of being non-partisan, but it is far from neutral in the sense of being devoid of values or convictions. It is committed to the public good, to democracy and human rights, and to basing policies and decisions on facts established through study, research and critical reflection – as well as to challenging received wisdom based on new discoveries. Luckily, the academic community is increasingly embracing the idea of engagement as a moral and intellectual imperative and as a part of its academic and institutional identity (Benson, Harkavy and Puckett 2017; Brink 2018).

The democratic mission of higher education

The engaged university, then, seeks to fulfil the democratic mission of higher education. An important component of the democratic mission of higher education is to motivate young people to exercise their voting rights and to do so on the basis of a considered and coherent view of how they want society to develop. Part of the democratic mission is to provide young people with the competences to do so – what the Council of Europe has come to call competences for a culture of democracy (Council of Europe 2018). The Council of Europe model comprises 20 competences centred around four clusters:

►values

►attitudes

►skills

►knowledge and critical understanding.

Nevertheless, seeing democracy as an issue uniquely of electoral participation is insufficient. Democracy requires free and fair elections but also participation by citizens7 in the life of societies and communities between and beyond elections. At a time when people seem to focus largely on their own interests and private space, a major part of the democratic mission of higher education is to stimulate a commitment in their students, graduates, faculties and staff to public space and the public good.

Voting and participation require deliberation (Gutmann and Thompson 2004). The ability to develop one’s own views and arguments and the will and ability to seriously consider those of others are part and parcel of the competences required for a culture of democracy. They are also part and parcel of the competences higher education should develop in its students. The Council of Europe has developed the notion of “multiperspectivity”, originally within its history education programme (Council of Europe 2001). In this context, multiperspectivity implies recognising that my history is not only mine but also that of my neighbours and that they may legitimately have a different view.

More broadly, multiperspectivity implies that we need to seek to see issues from several points of view and to understand why others may hold views very different from our own. Multiperspectivity, however, does not mean that all views are equally valid. We are not obliged to give up our own view unless we are convinced by the evidence and arguments of others or by the recognition that there are views that will always be unacceptable. Slavery and genocide are two examples of phenomena that cannot be legitimised regardless of how often they may have occurred in history. These examples also show the need to distinguish between understanding any given phenomenon and accepting it as legitimate. If we cannot understand the factors that led to slavery or genocide, we will also be unable to prevent them in the future. A culture of democracy must encourage confronting, even challenging, unacceptable views with arguments.

The democratic mission of higher education is developed within institutions – on campus – as well as outside of institutions – in society at large. Within institutions, the democratic mission is furthered through research, teaching, learning and engagement. Students acquire the competences required to be active, reflecting citizens. Competences for democratic culture comprise a set of attitudes and behaviours that seeks resolution of conflicts through dialogue; that accepts that while majorities decide, minorities have certain inalienable rights; and that sees diversities of background and opinion as a strength rather than as a threat. These competences are developed through study programmes, in the classroom, but also by engaging in community work and with associations, which may or may not be part of a study programme.

The democratic mission of higher education is also developed through institutional culture: institutions cannot credibly teach democracy without practising it. Democratic practice comprises student, faculty and staff participation in the governance of the institution and its faculties and departments as well as participation in student associations. This approach, reminiscent of the Kantian imperative to “act in such a way that each one of your actions can be the basis for a law”, is also known as a whole-institution approach.8

Higher education institutions must be “whole institutions” – they cannot preach without practising. It may be worth underlining that the injunction to be “whole institutions” in no way diminishes or relativises the need for facts, knowledge and understanding. Rather, a whole-institution approach reinforces this need, since the institution and its academic community cannot argue their importance in some contexts and dispense with them in others. Outside of the institution, the democratic mission is pursued through community engagement as well as by institutions and the academic community playing a broader societal role. The University of Pennsylvania (Weeks 2019) and Queen’s University Belfast (Gallagher 2019; Gallagher and Harrison 2015) are both examples of universities with high ambitions and standing in research and teaching that also play important roles in disadvantaged parts of their local communities. Penn and Queen’s are but two examples among many community-engaged higher education institutions in the US and Europe, even if our impression is still that US institutions generally give higher priority to community engagement than many European institutions do.

More broadly, members of the academic community provide knowledge and expertise on many issues of societal importance, from poverty through climate change to urban planning. It is an important reason why the broader society should finance higher education and research. Just as democracy cannot be built on ignorance, sustainable solutions to our societal challenges cannot be found except on the basis of the most advanced knowledge available, which universities, often working with partners in government, business and the community, provide. This does not preclude what is accepted knowledge today from being challenged by new research tomorrow.

New knowledge cannot be developed unless the academic community enjoys academic freedom and institutional autonomy. The argument for these two fundamental values of higher education is partly one of quality and efficiency and partly one of democracy and participation. However, rather than two separate arguments leading to the same conclusion, we would argue that they are two aspects of one and the same argument. Quality higher education and democracy are intertwined, and mutually supporting. Quality can only be fully developed within the atmosphere of free enquiry that should characterise democratic societies. Only a culture and atmosphere of democracy can foster quality higher education, and our societies cannot reach their full potential unless higher education makes contributing to developing the kind of society in which we would like our children and grandchildren to live its top priority.

Since 2018, we have seen examples – though the movement to combat climate change – of what young, determined people – many of them school or university students – can do. Many scientists have expressed support for the movement.9 It is our assertion that climate change cannot be combated effectively without a strong contribution by higher education and research. As the climate activist Greta Thunberg said before the US Congress: “I don’t want you to listen to me, I want you to listen to the scientists”.10 An important part of the challenge, of course, is that those who do not wish to make combating climate change a priority, and even dispute the reality of it, not only do not want to listen to scientists but in many cases question whether public funding should support research that leads to conclusions with which they disagree and even whether climate scientists should have the right to speak out. When those questioning the validity of science and the right of scientists to make their findings known hold political power, the results can lead to (self-)censorship under duress.11

A transatlantic co-operation

Since 1999, the Council of Europe and the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy have been working together to advance the democratic mission of higher education. The first part of their co-operation was a project on the university as a site of citizenship, and since 2006 the action has focused on a Global Forum every two to three years, always followed by a book in the Council of Europe Higher Education Series:12

1.The Responsibility of Higher Education for a Democratic Culture (Council of Europe Headquarters, Strasbourg, June 2006).13

2.Converging Competences: Diversity, Higher Education, and Sustainable Democracy (Council of Europe Headquarters, Strasbourg, October 2008).14

3.Reimagining Democratic Societies: A New Era of Personal and Social Responsibility? (University of Oslo, June 2011).15

4.Higher Education for Democratic Innovation (Queen’s University Belfast, June 2014).16

5.Higher Education for Diversity, Social Inclusion, and Community: A Democratic Imperative (LUMSA University, Rome, June 2017).17

6.Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy, and the Future of Democracy (Council of Europe Headquarters, Strasbourg, June 2019),18 to which we will return shortly.

Each Global Forum has gathered higher education leaders from Europe and North America, and increasingly also from other parts of the world, and in 2018 the Organization of American States joined the co-operation. The International Association of Universities has contributed to several Global Forums and joined the co-operation as a partner in 2019.

The transatlantic co-operation has recently been extended to comprise the local mission of higher education (Bergan, Harkavy and Munck 2019), in co-operation with the Anchor Institutions Task Force.19 Engagement in and with the local community is a core part of the democratic mission of higher education. It would be inconsistent, indeed problematic, to work for democracy at national, continental or global scale but neglect one’s immediate environment. To use the analogy of the whole-institution approach, the democratic mission of higher education must be a “whole-community” approach, with the community comprising local, regional, national, continental and global dimensions. We are therefore exploring how an organised European platform for co-operation on the local mission of higher education could best be established based on the three thematic conferences held so far, in Rome in 2017, in Dublin in 2018 and in Strasbourg in 2019. The next step will be to establish a small task force to consider the possibility of organising a platform that would combine advocacy and exchange of experience.

Freedom and autonomy to engage

Democracy cannot exist in the absence of freedom of thought and expression, without an independent judiciary and unless the authorities organising and overseeing elections have the will and ability to ensure that these are free and fair. Democracy also will not become a reality without engaged and committed citizens willing to work for the common good and with the competences to do so.

Higher education relies on these and other core components of democracy. Additionally, there are two values specific to the academic world, academic freedom and institutional autonomy that underpin higher education’s role in democratic society. These, and their importance to the future of democracy, were the focus of the 2019 Global Forum referred to above, held at the Council of Europe headquarters in Strasbourg on 20 and 21 June. The following section of our article will in particular draw on the declaration adopted by the forum (Global Forum 2019), the context that prompted this declaration at this time and the debates at the forum.

There are several reasons why the 2019 Global Forum focused on academic freedom and institutional autonomy. The immediate background is the increasing concern that the values we have come to take for granted are now under threat in ways Europe and North America have not seen for at least three decades, since the fall of the Berlin Wall. This event symbolises the political changes that extended democracy in principle to all of Europe, at least in terms of discourse and in most countries in terms of action, albeit at different levels of success. The Global Forum recognised this challenge by stating:

Significant violations of academic freedom and institutional autonomy threaten democracy. Sadly, their frequency is on the rise. Public authorities and the academic community alike must be vigilant in addressing and challenging such violations, and the responsibility for doing so does not stop at institutional or national borders. An attack on the freedom of one member of the academic community or the autonomy of one institution is an attack on the fundamental values of our democracies, regardless of where it takes place. (Global Forum 2019: paragraph 9)

While democracy has never been without potential for improvement, its basic premises are now questioned in Europe through nationalism, populism – mainly of the right but also of the left – and attempts to make “illiberal democracy” the Newspeak equivalent of the real thing. Analogous developments are occurring in the United States. The declaration adopted by the Global Forum unequivocally states that

Higher education can only fulfil its mission if faculty, staff and students enjoy academic freedom and institutions are autonomous; principles laid out in the Magna Charta Universitatum as well as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Status of Higher Education Teaching Personnel. (Global Forum 2019: paragraph 2)

As part of these developments, the freedom of academics to conduct research and publish research results independent of political, economic and other external considerations unrelated to academic norms and the autonomy of institutions are coming under increasing pressure in many countries, with the Central European University in Budapest but one example – cited here because the Provost of this university provided the keynote address at the 2019 Global Forum.20

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are not independent from academic and institutional responsibility to democracy and the common good. It not only matters what higher education institutions do, it also matters how they do it and to what ends. Among other things, that responsibility entails higher education demonstrating “openness, transparency, responsiveness and accountability as well as the will and ability to work with and contribute to the communities in which colleges and universities reside” (Global Forum 2019: paragraph 2).

The global scope of this forum is important because, while concern about the state of academic freedom and institutional autonomy is near universal, the most salient issues vary between countries and continents.

For example, the focus in the United States is largely on academic freedom and its relationship to the right to free speech on campus, most recently prompted by the alt right movement. Are these rights without limits or can universities legitimately refrain from giving a pulpit to those who would use the values of democracy to destroy its very soul by propagating hate speech, such as Nazis and other violent racists? Does my freedom of speech extend to a right to question your basic humanity?

Academic freedom is essential to both democracy and the quality of teaching and research and should therefore suffer as few restrictions as possible. The Global Forum declaration states:

Campuses must be fora of vigorous debate and honest pursuit of truth, guided by the desire to help all human beings. Any limits on freedom of expression must be based on protection of the specific rights of others (e.g., to protect against discrimination or defamation) rather than on expediency or to advance a single political ideology. (Global Forum 2019, paragraph 6)

In Europe, the focus is largely on institutional autonomy. The European and US views of the proper role of public authorities in higher education diverge significantly, which makes a transatlantic dialogue important in itself, but the dialogue is also important to develop our considerations beyond the traditional European emphasis on institutional autonomy primarily as an issue of the legal relationship between public authorities and higher education institutions.

Laws are of course important, and neither academic freedom nor institutional autonomy can exist unless a country’s legal framework allows them to exist. If public authorities are able to ban or refuse to accredit specific study programmes or disciplines on ideological grounds, as recently happened with gender studies in Hungary,21 or to impose or ban specific schools of thought, as with Marxist philosophy in countries under Soviet influence for much of the post-Second World War period up to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the need for effective legal protection of institutional autonomy has clearly not been met in the country in question.

At the time of writing, a draft law is under consideration in the Albanian Parliament that would limit the study of the crimes committed by the Communist movement during the Second World War, arguing that “the Communist regime cannot be linked with the Anti-Fascist and National Liberation War [WWII]” because the “elimination of political enemies only started after the war”.22 In the United Kingdom, a senior member of parliament – thus, a lawmaker – elicited strong rebuke from both the academic community and many political actors when he asked universities for an overview of “faculty teaching European affairs, with special reference to Brexit” as well as “copies of the syllabus and links to the online lectures which relate to this area”.23

However, laws alone cannot guarantee that rights are effectively enjoyed, and many issues related to academic freedom and institutional autonomy rely not only on a legal framework but on practice and attitudes as well as on an understanding of principles and nuances.

Neither academic freedom nor institutional autonomy is absolute, and the academic community does not exist independent of society. Few if any would argue that higher education institutions should be exempt from general laws regulating the safety of laboratories, financial accountability or the obligation to ensure fair and non-discriminatory practices for employment and access to study programmes. In democratic societies, higher education institutions are in general not free to limit or deny access to members of certain groups.

Not being exempt from such general laws is not a question of whether the higher education institutions are public or private, since both are part of an education system for which public authorities are responsible, and both public and private institutions carry out a public mandate to provide higher education.

Considering institutional autonomy also implies assessing the proper role of public authorities. At least in Europe, public authorities have a clear responsibility for the education – including higher education – system, and there is strong attachment to public funding of higher education. The Ministers of the European Higher Education Area have twice stated that higher education is a public good and a public responsibility (Bologna Process 2001, 2003), and in 2012 they referred to the importance of public funding: “…we commit to securing the highest possible level of public funding for higher education and drawing on other appropriate sources, as an investment in our future” (Bologna Process 2012: 4). In Europe, it would generally be seen as legitimate for public authorities to ensure higher education provision in all parts of the country, or in academic areas considered of particular importance. Hence, public authorities would be seen as acting within their mandate if they established an institution in an underserved part of the country or financed study programmes in, for example, minority languages or areas of particular strategic or economic importance, such as programmes in artificial intelligence. It would, however, not be seen as proper for public authorities to give instructions on the details of study programmes or curricula.

The Global Forum declaration referred to these challenges:

Administrative regulations, public and private indifference, considerations of immediate return on investment, a limited view of utility, and seeing higher education only through the lens of a narrow economic agenda also threaten academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Financial regulations and arrangements should be used to further rather than to limit institutional autonomy. More broadly, academic freedom and institutional autonomy are threatened by the absence of a vision that connects the purposes of higher education to democratic purpose. (Global Forum 2019, paragraph 11)

The financing of higher education also has an impact on both academic freedom and institutional autonomy. There are at least two issues at stake. On the one hand, if a single source finances a high proportion of the overall budget, whether of the institution as a whole or of a given study programme or research project, this puts the funder in a position where it could exercise considerable influence. However, the second factor is also important: funding may also be given with strictly specified conditions that may even extend to limiting the right to make research results public or influence the content of study or hiring of faculty. For example, the US-based Center for Public Integrity in 2014 accused the Koch brothers of giving a large gift to Florida State University that stipulated both curriculum and hiring decisions.24

The Global Forum declaration recognised issues related to funding models and conditions by stating:

Academic freedom and institutional autonomy are also threatened when financial support from individuals, private corporations, or institutional donors predominantly determines the focus of research and teaching and diminishes the public and democratic purposes of higher education. In general, public funding is fundamental, but financial support from multiple sources and financing not narrowly earmarked can strengthen academic freedom and institutional autonomy without diminishing the crucial societal role of higher education. (Global Forum 2019: paragraph 10)

A call for action

Paradoxically, to some extent academic freedom and institutional autonomy depends on public authorities refraining from taking certain kinds of action. As discussed above, public authorities can limit or impede the exercise of academic freedom and institutional autonomy through legislation, policies at system level, funding decisions or – in some cases – by creating an atmosphere of insecurity in society at large.

However, academic freedom and institutional autonomy are not just a question of non-action. On the contrary, public authorities, the academic community, higher education institutions and others should take positive action to safeguard and further these fundamental values of higher education. It is worth quoting the declaration adopted by the Global Forum at some length on this issue.

The participants in the Global Forum therefore call on

Members of the academic community and their organizations

►to orient their research, learning, and teaching toward developing knowledge and understanding based on facts and science and interpreting these in a spirit of open-mindedness and respect for differences of views, backgrounds, and traditions;

►to provide broader society with factually based knowledge and to base their own participation in public debate on the same standards of truthfulness, open-­mindedness and respect that should be at the base of their academic work;

►to refrain from any actions that could contribute to – or legitimize – the spread of false or misleading information, including spurious claims of “fake news” and “alternative facts”, or wilful distortion of the results of their own research or that of others.

Higher education institutions and their leaders

►to raise awareness among members of the academic community of the importance of academic freedom and institutional autonomy as well as the crucial role of higher education to democracy;

►to commit to maintaining, developing, and sustaining the public purpose and social responsibility of higher education;

►to explore the role and meaning of academic freedom and institutional autonomy within their respective institutions and systems, and the steps needed to protect these in an increasingly polarized and divided public sphere;

►to commit to – or maintain their commitment to, as the case may be – the Magna Charta Universitatum.

Higher education leaders and their organizations as well as public authorities at all levels

►to create and maintain the conditions for the academic community to enjoy freedom of research, learning, and teaching as well as the freedom to engage in public debate based on their academic work;

►to create and maintain an atmosphere of vigorous and respectful debate within their institutions and higher education systems;

►to ensure faculty, staff and students the freedom to teach, learn and research without the fear of disciplinary action, dismissal or any other form of retribution;

►to give due regard to academic freedom and institutional autonomy in setting higher education priorities, developing policies, and assessing funding options;

►to provide sufficiently secure employment conditions for faculty/academic staff to exercise academic freedom.

Public authorities

►to set the framework for academic freedom and institutional autonomy and continuously monitor the implementation of those fundamental rights, while en­couraging the adoption of sustainable long-term strategies for higher education;

►to take due account of the principles of academic freedom and institutional autonomy in developing regulations and policies in other areas of public responsibility;

►to balance the need for general rules and regulations ensuring the protection of individuals and guaranteeing sound public administration with respect for the principles of academic freedom and institutional autonomy;

►to provide strong public funding as a basic requirement for autonomy and aca­demic freedom.

The Council of Europe, the Organization of American States, and other international institutions and organizations

►to make academic freedom and institutional autonomy key elements of their work to further democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, through normative standards as well as policy;

►to address violations of academic freedom and institutional autonomy within their member States at a political level as well as through their education programmes and projects.

The Ministers of the European Higher Education Area, who will meet in Rome in June 2020

►to recommit to upholding academic freedom and institutional autonomy as part of the foundation on which the European Higher Education Area is built;

►to include the gathering of information on the respect for academic freedom and institutional autonomy in the Bologna Process Implementation Reports and to provide and facilitate the gathering of such information within their own countries and systems;

►to address violations of academic freedom and institutional autonomy at political level within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), in view of their collective political responsibility for the EHEA.

The Council of Europe, the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy, the Organization of American States, and other partners in our co-operation on the democratic mission of higher education

►to continue their work to strengthen the role of higher education in developing, maintaining, and sustaining democratic societies;

►to continue to highlight the importance of academic freedom and institutional autonomy in furthering higher education’s democratic mission as well as to develop policy proposals and engage in public advocacy to more fully achieve that mission. (Global Forum 2019).

Conclusion

We hope to have demonstrated the importance not only of higher education institutions and the academic community engaging with the significant burning issues we face as societies, but at the heart of the mission of higher education. Indeed, this should be part of higher education’s DNA. Our societies cannot prosper or even survive without the engagement and contribution of higher education.

In our view, higher education cannot fully play this role except in democratic societies, which provide fertile soil for the free exchange of ideas and the unfettered pursuit of knowledge to improve human welfare. Democracy is vital in enabling higher education to play its societal role, but higher education is equally vital in safeguarding and developing democracy.

The democratic mission of higher education, which is the foundation of the engaged university, is largely an issue of how higher education works with its local community, the broader society and the world. However, higher education cannot play its proper role in furthering democracy – as well as in furthering the quality of research, teaching and learning – unless it enjoys academic freedom and institutional autonomy. This is not a privilege but a condition for higher education to make its full contribution to the society of which it is a part.

On the face of it, this is a straightforward statement with which it would seem difficult to disagree on grounds of principle. Nevertheless, translating the basic principle into legislation, policy and practice is far from straightforward. We hope to have explored some of the complexity of the issue, which is a considerable challenge to the academic community as well as to those in broader society who wish to further democracy.

Our task as educators and policy makers is to continue to explore the many issues of academic freedom and institutional autonomy, to strengthen higher education and to strengthen democracy. Few sectors of society are better placed than higher education to develop the competences required for voting, participation, respectful deliberation, and democratic problem-solving. Rarely has this task been as urgent as it is now. Higher education must engage today to help develop and maintain the kind of society in which we would like to live tomorrow.

References

Benson L., Harkavy I. and Puckett J. (2017),Knowledge for Social Change: Bacon, Dewey, and the Revolutionary Transformation of Research Universities in the Twenty-First Century,Temple University Press, Philadelphia.

Bergan S., Harkavy I. and Munck R. (2019), The Local Mission of higher Education: Principles and Practice, Glasnevin Publishers, Dublin.

Bologna Process (2001), “Towards the European Higher Education Area”, available at www.ehea.info/Upload/document/ministerial_declarations/2001_Prague_Communique_English_553442.pdf, accessed 1 October 2019.

Bologna Process (2003), “Realising the European Higher Education Area”, Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education in Berlin on 19 September 2003, available at www.ehea.info/Upload/document/ministerial_declarations/2003_Berlin_Communique_English_577284.pdf, accessed 1 October 2019.

Bologna Process (2012), “Making the Most of Our Potential: Consolidating the European Higher Education Area”, Bucharest Communiqué, available at www.ehea.info/Upload/document/ministerial_declarations/Bucharest_Communique_2012_610673.pdf, accessed 1 October 2019.

Brink C. (2018), The Soul of the University: Why Excellence Is Not Enough, Bristol University Press, Bristol.

Council of Europe (2001), Recommendation Rec(2001)15 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on history teaching in twenty-first-century Europe, available at https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805e2c31, accessed 1 October 2019.

Council of Europe (2018), Reference framework of competences for democratic culture, Volume 1 – Context, concepts and model; Volume 2 – Descriptors; Volume 3 – Guidance for implementation, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, also available online at www.coe.int/en/web/education/competences-for-democratic-culture, accessed 1 October 2019.

Gallagher T. (2019), “Embedding Engagement: the Example of Queen’s University Belfast”, in Bergan S., Harkavy I. and Munck R., The Local Mission of Higher Education: Principles and Practice, pp. 52-62.

Gallagher T. and Harrison J. (2015), “Civic engagement in a divided society: the role of Queen’s University Belfast in Northern Ireland”, in Bergan S., Gallagher T. and Harkavy I. (eds), Higher Education for Democratic Innovation, Council of Europe Higher Education Series No. 21, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, pp. 51-62.

Global Forum (2019), “Global Forum on Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy, and the Future of Democracy Declaration”, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 20-21 June 2019, co-organised by the Council of Europe; the International Consortium for Higher Education, Civic Responsibility and Democracy; the Organization of American States; the Magna Charta Observatory; and the International Association of Universities, available at https://rm.coe.int/global-forum-declaration-global-forum-final-21-06-19-003-/16809523e5, accessed 1 October 2019 and included in this volume.

Gutmann A. and Thompson D. (2004), Why Deliberative Democracy?, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Weeks J. (2019), “Campus and Community Revitalization in the United States: Penn’s Evolution as an Anchor Institution”, in Bergan S., Harkavy I. and Munck R. (eds), The Local Mission of higher Education: Principles and Practice, pp. 39-51.

6. A first version of this article was published in Transform, the journal published by Engaged Australia, in Issue 4, September 2019.

7. In the sense of members of a given community, not just as holders of a given nationality or passport. In many countries, non-citizens have voting rights in local and regional elections, subject to residence requirements, and resident non-citizens participate in civil society associations.

8. A guidance document on the whole-school approach will be found in Volume 3 of the Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture (Council of Europe 2018), whereas a guidance document on the Framework in the context of higher education, which is under preparation, will include guidance on a whole-institution approach.

9. See for example the appeal signed by over 3 600 Belgian academics https://scientists4climate.be/letter/english/ and the support expressed by some 12 000 German academics www.deutschlandfunk.de/scientists4future-wissenschaftler-unterstuetzen.697.de.html?dram:article_id=443354., both accessed 3 October 2019.

10. www.sciencealert.com/greta-thunberg-wants-you-to-listen-to-scientists-not-her, accessed 1 October 2019.

11. For an example from early autumn 2019, see the so-called “Sharpiegate”: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/07/sharpiegate-trump-alabama-hurricane-dorian, accessed 1 October 2019.

12. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/publications, accessed 1 October 2019.

13. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/forum-the-responsibility-of-higher-education-for-a-democratic-culture-2006-, accessed 1 October 2019.

14. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/invitational-forum-on-converging-competences-diversity-higher-education-and-sustainable-democracy-2008-, accessed 1 October 2019.

15. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/conference-reimagining-democratic-societies-a-new-era-of-personal-and-social-responsibility-, accessed 1 October 2019.

16. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/conference-higher-education-for-democratic-innovation-, accessed 1 October 2019.

17. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/conference-higher-education-for-diversity-social-inclusion-and-community-a-democratic-imperative-, accessed 1 October 2019.

18. www.coe.int/en/web/higher-education-and-research/-/global-forum-on-academic-freedom-institutional-autonomy-and-the-future-of-democracy, accessed 1 October 2019.

19. www.margainc.com/, accessed 1 October 2019.

20. www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/12/04/central-european-university-forced-out-hungary-moving-vienna, accessed 25 July 2019.

21. www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20181020111651678, accessed 1 October 2019.

22. https://balkaninsight.com/2019/07/16/albania-to-ban-the-study-of-wwii-as-part-of-communist-period/, accessed 1 October 2019.

23. www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/24/universities-mccarthyism-mp-demands-list-brexit-chris-heaton-harris, accessed 1 October 2019.

24. https://publicintegrity.org/federal-politics/koch-foundation-proposal-to-college-teach-our-curriculum-get-millions/, accessed 1 October 2019. In the United States, the Koch brothers have significant economic power with a record of large donations to organisations and causes with a specific ideological agenda. David H. Koch passed away in August 2019.

Academic freedom, university autonomy and democracy’s future in Europe

Liviu Matei

Abstract

This paper was delivered as a keynote address at the 2019 Global Forum on Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy, and the Future of Democracy. It makes the point about the existence of a crisis of academic freedom presently that is specific to Europe, or the European Higher Education Area, and discusses the nature and origins of this crisis. The crisis of academic freedom in Europe is both intellectual and empiric. The paper raises questions about how the relationship between higher education and democracy should be analysed and understood, in view of this crisis of academic freedom.

Keywords: academic freedom; European Higher Education Area; democracy; crisis of academic freedom.

2019 – A year of celebration in European higher education?

This is an important time to deliberate about academic freedom, institutional autonomy and the future of democracy in Europe. News about recent developments are mainly not good. Unfortunately, the subtitle of this chapter could very well be “The crisis of academic freedom in Europe”. Because, let it be said clearly, we are in the middle of a crisis of academic freedom in Europe.

I would like, however, to start on a positive note and with a few words of gratitude. Fortunately, there is good reason for that.

The year 2019 is a year of celebrations in European higher education. It is the 20th anniversary of the Bologna Process. Whatever the shortcomings of this process, and there are many (Matei, Craciun and Torotcoi 2018; Vögtle 2019), we have a lot to celebrate. Higher education has advanced significantly during this time and at least in part due to this pan-European initiative and process. The most important achievement, for me, is the creation of a common space for dialogue and action in higher education comprising basically the entire European continent, which has made innovation and progress possible. This is an unprecedented development in the history of higher education. The Bologna Process as a whole is breathtaking in the magnitude of transformations it has made possible.

Many well-known European organisations have made a contribution to the vast changes of the last 20 years in the EHEA.25 So have many anonymous individuals: academics, administrators, policy makers and students. These are the people I like to call “the Bologna soldiers”. I am one of them myself. The year 2019 should be their celebration. In this celebratory year, I would like to acknowledge those who made Bologna and the European Higher Education Area happen, before I get to my precise subject regarding academic freedom.

History is ungrateful not only to the foot soldiers in higher education, who remain anonymous, but also to the leaders and ground breakers, who most often remain anonymous as well. We rarely know where major initiatives, that have changed the face of higher education, if not the world, originate. Who had the idea of the GI Bill in the US in 1944, which probably opened the door to the massification of higher education? Who exactly in 1999-2000 had the idea of a European strategy for a knowledge society, and as part of this, of a European Research Area? Who invented the Erasmus programme? Very few know, and no particular individual gets recognition for that particular pioneering undertaking. It is not publicly known who exactly had the idea for the Bologna Process itself,26 let alone for its many important discrete initiatives. Neither the general public nor even most of the people who have studied or worked in universities in the EHEA in the last 20 years and whose lives have been dramatically impacted by this process know who devised it.