Academic freedom in Europe: European Parliament raises the alarm

Academic freedom pretty much means that scientists can conduct research how they want, communicate their findings to the public, and teach. They are also allowed to choose their own topics and questions. But in practice, things are trickier. Where do they obtain funding and who protects them from controversy and lawsuits? 
  
Universities are responsible for the conditions under which academic freedom can be exercised. In the Netherlands, as in many other European countries, that's what the law says. But the law does not define exactly what academic freedom is. And even within the institution, views on academic freedom may differ: is it there only for scientists or also for students and teachers? And when is an opinion academic enough? 
  
An increasing threat 
The researchers looked at a previous study of university autonomy, media coverage, and scholarly articles. They outlined some worrisome trends across the 27 states. Governments are reportedly interfering more frequently in the research and policies of institutions. Hungary is an extreme case: there, the state can determine which academic areas are “scientific” and which are not. Such interference also exists in other Eastern European countries but to a lesser extent. 

In other EU countries, the freedom of movement of institutions is threatened by politics. In Germany, for example, the right-wing populist party Alternative für Deutschland wanted to ban gender studies. That had no consequences but put pressure on scientists. 
  
The researchers call for a European consensus on academic freedom so that it can be better measured. The idea is to allow countries, scientists, and policymakers to compare data and learn from each other. That would increase resilience. 

Netherlands 
The report also paints a picture of the Netherlands. There are growing concerns, as in other countries, about the increased power of university management and the hierarchical structure of institutions. The report also points to a growing number of complaints about a polarized social debate (and cancel culture), corporate funding of research, and the working conditions of researchers. 
  
Education Minister Robbert Dijkgraaf is not so sure that a European definition would be a great improvement, according to his reaction to the report. But he does welcome the focus on academic freedom. “I emphasize the importance of continued dialogue, nuance, and further analysis in specific case histories.” 
  
Dijkgraaf will discuss the strong hierarchy at universities with the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) and The Young Academy. Along with the effects of cancel culture, the topic should be included in an ongoing study on self-censorship, academic freedom, and limiting the diversity of perspectives in research and higher education. 

Finally, he points to ongoing investments in fellowships, permanent contracts, and the publication of lists on external funding for chairs. These should give scientists more freedom. 
  
Own research topics 
In an earlier study on academic freedom in the Netherlands, the KNAW already criticized the hierarchy at universities. Due to a lack of democratic decision-making, a large number of budgets were said to be reserved for strategic-thematic research. This makes it difficult for scientists to propose their own research themes. 
  
As a result of the Laurens Buijs case, the Stolker Committee is currently conducting research at the UvA, including research into what exactly academic freedom means or should mean.