New Frameworks of Reference Stir Hope for Academic Freedom

The emergence of new frameworks of reference for academic freedom is a remarkable recent development.

In some cases, they represent significant efforts to address the crisis of academic freedom that unfolded in different parts of the world after the Great Recession of 2007-2009.

Frameworks of reference for academic freedom can be identified at different levels: institutional, national or systemic, regional and global.

As a rule, they include a conceptual reference for academic freedom, and also, variably, all or some of the following: elements of codification (legislative or non-legislative norms, regulations, codes of conduct, etcetera), guidelines for practice and provisions about institutions and institutional mechanisms that should or could oversee the implementation of the respective understanding and codifications of academic freedom.

A common reference is a conceptual elaboration that serves as a go-to conceptual source or ‘anchor’ for actors inside and outside the university, and which they use in sync in a particular context for the understanding, codification and practice of academic freedom.

A typical example is the framework of reference for the fundamental values of higher education in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

The EHEA currently comprises 47 countries, after the suspension of Russia and Belarus in 2022. Between 2018 and 2024, the EHEA members officially adopted a common list of six “fundamental values of higher education”: academic freedom; integrity; institutional autonomy; participation of students and staff in governance; and public responsibility for and of higher education.

They also adopted official statements with shared conceptual references for each value.

The 2020 Statement on Academic Freedom, for example, put forward a new conceptual elaboration for academic freedom shared, at least nominally, in the entire EHEA.

In this way, it created for the first time a European-wide (regional) reference for academic freedom, a conceptual anchor meant to orient the work of university students, staff and leadership, national public authorities and all organisations active in higher education on the continent. This is how conceptual references work.

Furthermore, the EHEA countries made explicit commitments to protect (through legislation) and promote (through policies and other initiatives) these values as jointly defined. Finally, they agreed on a transnational implementation tool, in the form of a monitoring mechanism of commitments and values.

The crisis of academic freedom

The work to develop this regional framework of reference started around 2018 in order to address the crisis of academic freedom, which became perceptible with the Central European University affair, when many in Europe realised that there was no shared, up-to-date and effective conceptual reference for academic freedom.

Symptomatically, the European Court of Justice based a verdict against Hungary in this case (never enforced), primarily on commercial legislation (infringement of the right to deliver commercial services by a university), given the lack of workable common European legal references for academic freedom itself.

At about the same time, the European Parliament considered modifying the founding treaties of the European Union (EU) to create explicit and enforceable constitutional norms for the protection of academic freedom. That was not possible, for political and legal reasons.

The parliament currently intends to adopt lower-level legislation for the same purpose, sketching along the way a new framework of reference for academic freedom in the EU countries alone. In the same context, the EU Commission is currently finalising non-legally binding “guiding principles” for the protection and promotion of what it calls “fundamental academic values”.

Global frameworks

United Nations or UNESCO documents contain several older conceptual references for academic freedom and related concepts (such as institutional autonomy and freedom of research), along with provisions for their protection. These are parts of what could be called global frameworks of reference.

In 2023, the UN adopted a set of principles for implementing a right to academic freedom, meant to complete a particular global framework and help to address more recent challenges to academic freedom.

In South Africa, a national framework of reference was developed recently, linking academic freedom, university autonomy and public accountability, defined in relation to each other, and including a set of regulatory obligations for various actors.

In the United Kingdom, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Law was adopted in 2023 and was due to enter into force in 2024. It put forward a new definition (national reference) for academic freedom, articulated new legal obligations for universities and other actors and clarified the institutions responsible for implementation.

The law came in for criticism, in particular for what some consider a restrictive conceptualisation of academic freedom (conflated with freedom of speech), and a rigid legalistic approach that does not help to tackle a deeper crisis of academic freedom and does not focus (as it should) on the production and transmission of knowledge in the long run, but rather on a superficial, temporary culture wars episode.

In a remarkable reversal, the newly elected Labour government suspended its implementation in July 2024.

In the United States, Florida adopted legislation in 2023-24 promoting a new and restrictive understanding of academic freedom. This is a state-level conceptual reference, attempting to replace a national one, the reputable American Association of University Professors’ definition of academic freedom.

Florida authorities adopted legal and regulatory provisions configuring a new, state-level framework of reference, which impacts higher education to the point that politicians or other interest groups from outside educational institutions can decide what books can be read (or not), and what can be taught (or not).

A puzzle

At present, there is a puzzle of overlapping older and newly emerging frameworks of reference for academic freedom in the world. They sometimes communicate smoothly, vertically and horizontally – but not always.

This may create tension and confusion, or it may be helpful, in some cases.

In the UK, for example, universities are required to adopt institutional-level codes of conduct reflecting the new national framework of reference for academic freedom. Some of them see the existence of a puzzle of overlapping frameworks (national, regional, global) as a chance to avoid the deficiencies of the national law.

They acknowledge the new national legal provisions mentioned above and, of course, commit to observe them, but at the same time go beyond them, also including elements from other frameworks of reference, better adapted to current challenges to academic freedom, such as Magna Charta Universitatum (a global framework of reference revised recently, in 2020) or the EHEA, mentioned above.

Some of the newly emerging frameworks of reference have a negative impact on academic freedom. Others are meant explicitly to address recent, new types of challenges, or even directly the crisis of academic freedom. There are many positive signs and reasons for hope.

Liviu Matei is a professor of higher education and public policy and head of the School of Education, Communication and Society at King’s College London, UK. He is founder of the Global Observatory on Academic Freedom. This text is a shorter version of a presentation made at the 2024 Congress of Scholars at Risk.

This is an updated version of an article that was first published by University World News on 28 August 2024. You can read the original version here. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20240827182451588