Lecture by the President of the Republic, Dr Danilo Türk, delivered at the ceremony marking the 20th anniversary of the Magna Charta Universitatum
Bologna, Italy, 18.9.2008 | speech
The President of the Republic, Dr Danilo Türk, attended a ceremony marking the 20th anniversary of the Magna Charta Universitatum, where he gave a keynote lecture entitled "The purpose of Academic Freedom Today":
The purpose of academic freedom today
Bologna, 18 September 2008
Honourable Professor Pier Ugo Calzolari, Rector of the University of Bologna,
Honourable Professor Michael Daxner, President of the Magna Charta Observatory Council,
Distinguished guests,
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a special privilege and honor to address this august assembly, gathered today to celebrate the 20th anniversary of an important document, The Magna Charta Universitatum.
We gather in the premises of the oldest University in Europe. The establishment of this University in 1088, more than 900 years ago, marked the beginning of universities, one of the most significant achievements in the entire intellectual and social history of humankind.
Universities have been and continue to be the breeding ground of ideas and knowledge, which is generating cultural, scientific and technological development. They are the centers of critical thought and the vanguard of innovation. Modern development without universities is unthinkable.
A university is always a sensitive and complex system. It is a combination of tradition and innovation. It is a mixture of strictness of methodological discipline and relaxation of creative imagination. Its rituals are often formal while its way of life must allow informality and even space for eccentricity which is necessary for creative thinking. Only a combination of all these qualities makes the right intellectual atmosphere at a university which is fundamental for its best output.
Universities feel constant challenge to their ways of working – challenges coming both from within and from outside. And again, the University of Bologna, the Alma Mater Studiorum, is an excellent example of these challenges. About 500 years ago, in 1516 it was here, at this University, where Ulrich von Hutten wrote his famous second book of Epistolae obscurorum virorum, the Letters of Obscure Men, a sharp satire which ridiculed the then outdated ways of scholastic thinking which still dominated in the majority of European universities. Von Hutten's work, together with that of such great figures as Erasmus of Rotterdam, provoked an energetic discussion in the entire European space. It helped to change the European university landscape and the intellectual situation of Europe as a whole. This was a prime example of change coming from within universities. The ability to generate change from within should remain a value cherished by the universities in our era as well.
Universities are never really monolithic or immutable organizations. They are both subject to internal diversity and comprehensive change. And they have to learn from each other and from national university systems. Today we often look, and rightly so, towards the American universities which have become the most dynamic and creative part of the global university landscape in our time. At the same time, it has to be understood that modern American universities have incorporated and developed further much of European achievement. At the end of the 19th Century the American universities looked towards Europe where the major universities already developed methodologies of ambitious research based on teamwork and leadership by the most illustrious professors of the time. That model resembled ambitious and energetic organization of businesses of that era and invested heavily in research, which had to be organized in new ways. Ambitious and rigorous research was also the major guarantee of quality of teaching. Investment in laboratories, libraries - and in great professors - became the trademark of university excellence. All these requirements were first understood and tested in Europe and are as valid today as they were at their beginning. If anything, their importance has only increased.
At the same time, universities have to cultivate those values, which guarantee their status and their role in the society. Central among them is the value of academic freedom. This assembly today is gathered to celebrate, to nurture and to give specific content to this fundamental value.
This is no coincidence. Three out of four basic principles proclaimed in the Magna Charta Universitatum express the value of academic freedom:
First, the Charter defines the university as an autonomous institution;
Second, it emphasizes freedom of research, teaching and artistic creation and
Third, it reiterates the openness of university to dialogue.
These are pronouncements of fundamental importance because there is no better guarantee of university's creativity, innovation and, ultimately of its role as an agent of social, economic and technological development. Academic freedom must be enjoyed both by the institution and by the individuals, in particular teachers, researchers and students who make up the institution.
The actual exercise of any freedom invites further questions. Two among them are fundamental: First, freedom from what? And second, freedom for what? They are continuously relevant to the academic world.
Over time, the answers to the first question have become clear and universal. Universities have to enjoy real autonomy and their professors and students have to enjoy freedom from political interference and of all other forms of pressure coming from public authority. To this I would add that undesired influences which might originate from the private sector and which limit the freedom of research and teaching must also be rejected.
The second question, i.e. freedom for what, is more difficult to answer in an unequivocal manner. The purposes for establishment of universities vary. They also change over time. The purpose of a university and its freedom needs to be constantly reviewed and refined. This process of review and refinement is precisely the place for creativity, academic ambition, openness and dialogue. All these qualities have to be expressed in the daily life of a university and in the development of its vision. Thus, freedom is given specific purpose. And freedom with a purpose is a powerful tool of change.
Freedom with a purpose requires a careful reflection about the means at our disposal. It is therefore logical that the Magna Charta Universitatum pays particular attention to the instruments for the realization of the academic freedom. One among them is as important as it is time-specific in Europe today.
Europe is in the process of reestablishing itself as a single intellectual space. It already existed as such centuries ago, at a much lower level of social, economic and intellectual development. Later on, creation of nation states gave rise to limitations, although, truth to be said, intellectual creativity was never completely confined within the state frontiers. The era of divisions has reached its peak during the Cold War when the ideological and political divide between East and West greatly disfigured the intellectual Europe as a whole and, in its eastern part, the exercise of the academic freedom and human rights as well. But that period is over and the frontiers among European nation states are melting. It is only natural that the idea of Europe as a single intellectual space, while never dormant, became one of the most promising and potentially most powerful ideas of Europe in our time.
The concept of Europe as a single intellectual space can mean many things. It means an enlarged geographical area of academic debate and cooperation, offering a variety of exciting opportunities to all participants. It also means an additional dimension of the European Union, the most powerful European institution today. Last March, the European Council has, under the presidency of Slovenia, called for the creation of Europe's fifth freedom. To the free movement of goods, services and capital, the EU will add the freedom of movement of knowledge. Let us think together and try to define, with the necessary academic rigor and precision, the requirements of freedom of movement of knowledge in Europe.
The emerging single European intellectual space can be developed into a powerful instrument of academic freedom. A space undivided and vibrant with intellectual communication will be an important guarantee of excellence, creativity and innovation.
However, as every researcher knows, development of an instrument is a major task in itself and takes time and effort. The reality today is that Europe as a whole has too few well trained researchers - taking into account both those working at universities and others. It is obvious that without a sufficiently strong force of researchers Europe will not be able to develop a sufficiently active role in science, technology and innovation and that the emerging European intellectual space will not be able to develop its full potential. In other words, as an instrument of academic creativity and freedom, the European intellectual space needs serious investment so as to develop a sufficiently strong cadre of researchers. Their careers must be made sufficiently attractive, their contracts sufficiently stable and their role in the European intellectual space sufficiently active.
The benefits of all-European participation in research are historically proven. Let us recall that a century ago a young lady from Poland, Marie Sklodowska, after moving to Paris, conducted pivotal research on radioactivity which opened a new chapter in science and changed the world. There is, obviously, no substitute for individual genius. But creation of a propitious working environment is a major contribution to the proper use of human talent.
The European Union seems to be aware of this. The work done so far on the creation of the European Research Area is praiseworthy. It is concentrated on such fundamentals as the open recruitment, transparency, favorable working conditions, better mobility and securer career paths for researchers. The European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for their recruitment represent a valuable conceptual and policy framework for the future development. It is very encouraging that in the three years after adoption these two fundamental documents they have received more than 800 signatories representing around 200 organizations from more than 20 European Countries. This clearly demonstrates the awareness that Europe must strengthen its total potential in research in order to be able to cope with the challenges of today and those awaiting us tomorrow.
But more needs to be done. The European Research area and, more broadly, a single European intellectual space require also an improved management and financing of research. Increasingly, research is conducted on a competitive basis and so is its access to funding. Financing of research is moving towards project based funding. For universities this represents a problem since they are, generally speaking, not best suited to funding on a competitive basis, complying with requirements of the provider of the funds. Additionally, universities are the custodians of scientific disciplines and have a responsibility for the fundamental research in those disciplines. This engages human resources and makes them less competitive with respect to projects funded by industry and other private sector funders.
Here the role of governments is critical. In their decisions of funding, governments have to pay attention to the dual role of universities - that of custodians of disciplines and the other of research organizations competing for specific projects. Public universities have to enjoy the necessary support for their work on the basic scientific disciplines.
Governments also have to provide a general regulatory framework, which will enable employers and funders to ensure that the performance of researchers is not undermined by instability of employment contracts. Public authorities have to think about incentives, which will ensure retention of researchers and attractiveness of their career.
This aspect needs to be strongly emphasized. Today in Europe too few young people are taking up research as a career. While this is not a purely European problem it is particularly significant in Europe and especially so in the context of the vision of a single European intellectual space. How can this vision succeed when science is viewed by too many young people as an option which is - by comparison with other job opportunities - too difficult, one requiring hard work and long studies but at the same time involving poor rewards, low social status and professional uncertainty?
Much more needs to be done at the level of general perceptions and public conscience. Science and intellectual work need to regain higher respect and social prestige. It must become clear that our future depends on our ability to find solutions to enormous problems posed by global warming and environmental degradation and that such solutions are unlikely without major changes in technology and our way of life. Making this clear to the general public is the task of the political leaders. We have to explain to the public that the era of quick profits is bound to end. Global warming has already created conditions in which the time for change is running out. Our future will depend on technological innovation, which in turn, requires more investment in science. The world as a whole is lagging behind. But Europe is expected to show the direction of change and is expected to lead.
So perceptions must change. In addition there is a need to remove barriers which currently hinder a more integrated European Research Area. The existing national regulations do not favor mobility of researchers across national borders. Very often such mobility involves serious risks with regard to advancements in career, to social security benefits and to pension rights of the migrating researcher.
It is obvious that, in reality, the concept of "freedom of research" is not automatically implemantable. It requires sophisticated organizational models, careful policy making by both universities and governments and constant care for adjustment and change. And, viewed from the perspective of European Union as a whole, it requires tackling such issues as specialization and promotion of excellence in areas of specialized expertise. Obviously in matters like this, the role of the governments and the European Commission and its financing of research is indispensable. But a proactive role of the universities is also called for. Each university can define its strategy of research and teaching in a manner cognizant of its area of specialization, within the European intellectual space as a whole.
Teaching, obviously, involves a series of additional questions. Are the teaching processes at the European universities sufficiently informed with the broader European picture or are they still predominantly defined by national factors? Is the organization of teaching sufficiently responsive to the evolving needs of societies or is it still insulated from labor markets? Are the structures and rules of governance of European universities adequate? And, importantly, is the funding of university teaching adequate?
Governance and management of universities are constantly on the agenda of public debate in all European countries. Ideally this debate should help defining the relationship between public authorities and universities and to refine their respective roles. While public authorities have to help developing the university system as a whole, the universities involved in these debates define the actual scope of their autonomy and, indirectly, the scope of the academic freedom. This type of dialogue has been a characteristic of development in Europe throughout history. In our era it has only gained in intensity and is now involving the European Union institutions as well. The EU Agenda on the Modernization of Universities is one of the products of this dialogue which is contributing to improved coherence of development of higher education in Europe.
This dialogue also helps in clarifying the needed funding reforms and should lead to an increased and more efficient funding of university education, including through investment in quality and reform.
Among all the efforts to help in the evolution of the university teaching in Europe, the curricular reforms constitute a separate category, one of special importance. And again, the name of Bologna is relevant in this context.
The basic purpose of Bologna process is to establish a Europe - wide area of academic mobility and thus to create a solid foundation of the integrated European intellectual space. This purpose is to be achieved by removal of various hurdles to mobility across borders, by stimulation of studies outside a student's alma mater and by addressing other problems. Let us keep in mind that in many European countries the programs of university studies are too long, that the drop-out rates are unacceptably high and that there is often a mismatch between the profiles of graduates and the needs of the labor market. The resulting unemployment among university graduates represents a waste of potential and a sad reminder that improvement is sorely needed.
The early attempt to address the issue of mobility of students, known as the Erasmus program has clearly been a success. As a former professor of international law and mentor of a number of Erasmus students who are coming to Ljubljana, I can testify on the success of this program. Not only do students gain from comparing different academic perspectives, or from working with different teachers, the very experience of a different academic environment and social contacts with fellow students in another European country add to the capital gained in the process. The success of this and other similar programs is beyond doubt. These programs have to be expanded.
At the same time the Bologna process has reached an important stage of its realization. Many universities have established, in accordance with Bologna Declaration, a system of studies organized in two cycles - combined with a credit system. The degrees became more comparable.
On the other hand, the quality assurance procedures which are also required under this system are likely to take more time to test and fully establish. Progress made so far in the area of the external quality assurance is encouraging. The initial success of the Register of the European Higher Education Quality Assurance Agencies is promising. But more needs to be done. Bologna process must yield a higher quality of university education in Europe. Ranking of universities will continue to be indispensable. This will continue to be so, not least because of the tendency among parents and students to follow the international ranking of universities and to base their decisions on the ranking achieved. Let us work towards the highest standards of achievement. And let us not lose optimism. Some positive international effects of the Bologna process are already felt. The number of states participating in the system has grown to over forty and involves several non- European countries.
Bologna reform process is aiming at several objectives. One of them is to achieve an earlier completion of studies and greater employability of the graduates. This presents an important challenge: On the one hand, the student needs to be informed about the employment opportunities sufficiently early and must be stimulated to choose among disciplines which offer a good professional future. On the other hand, employability in many fields of studies, especially in social sciences and humanities, requires that students obtain knowledge and skills beyond the specific field in which they have studied. This is important because in the future the intellectual will be increasingly expected to operate in a solution - oriented mode inspired by the concept of common good. This will be necessary in Europe, as well as in all other parts of the world. And, most important, the ability to innovate in a solution oriented mode is the only way which will guarantee the European intellectual an adequate place in the globalized world.
European Union is becoming increasingly aware of this. This year, during the Presidency of Slovenia, the EU started a series of activities under the heading of the intercultural dialogue. Intercultural dialogue offers an additional policy framework for a strengthened role of the European universities in the globalized world. And again, the question is how can the principle of academic freedom help in this process. What is the purpose of academic freedom in the context of a global intercultural dialogue? And what role should the European universities seek in this context? This is a question worthy of an in-depth discussion, one which will be at the same time rigorous and practical.
Among the specific questions which need to be addressed, the following come to mind immediately: Are the European universities sufficiently connected with the universities in other parts of the world? Are they sufficiently present in the most dynamic parts of the world today such as East and South East Asia? Do we have sufficiently developed models of cooperation and are the governments ready to invest in assistance to such models? What can we learn from the experience of other universities, in particular the American universities?
Some of the answers are not new. European and, more generally, Western universities have been traditionally open to students from every corner of the world and have done more than any other type of institution to bolster knowledge and freedom as universal values. By doing this they have also indirectly helped in the rise of other civilizations and enriched the texture of the present -day intercultural dialogue and mutual communication among civilizations. Europe must increase the number of students and professors from other parts of the world to study and work at European universities. This is the most fundamental and time-tested form of intercultural dialogue and cooperation among civilizations.
In addition, there is also a great scope for innovation. Europe should direct its intellectual potential towards an intensified exchange with the Mediterranean, the Middle East and Asia where the academic development is booming. To the observers from other continents Europe often projects an introverted image.. But today, the concept of a unified European intellectual space cannot be complete without and appropriately developed global dimension. Let us use the concept of intercultural dialogue for this purpose. Let us think big and let us innovate.
In Slovenia we launched, earlier this year the creation of a Mediterranean University which will connect a number of European and other Mediterranean universities, teachers and students in an effort to promote academic excellence in a selected number of areas and to create an intercultural environment of research and teaching. While not entirely new, this idea is being carried out in Slovenia, a Mediterranean country which offers a fresh space for cooperation not burdened with any kind of historical legacy and completely open to pragmatic innovation.
European universities should invest more in cooperation and establishing institutions of high learning and research in other parts of the world, especially in the Middle East and Asia. Some among the European universities are among the key participants of the current revolution in higher education in the Gulf countries. But more can be done. Kishore Mahbubani, a distinguished Singaporean scholar and diplomat has recently suggested that Europe could help reviving one of the ancient centers of high learning in the Arab world. Seen in a historical perspective this would represent an act of gratitude for the contribution of the great Arab scholars who a millennium and more ago preserved the intellectual heritage of ancient Greece and made their own contribution to the intellectual growth of Europe. Morcover In a contemporary context such a project would also represent a real contribution to overcoming the friction between Christian Europe and the Arab part of the Islamic world. And above all, it would be an investment in our shared future. I consider this kind of ideas valuable and worth considering as examples of the purpose of the principle of academic freedom today.
Let me sum - up:
Academic freedom is at the center of the very existence of European universities as it has always been. But in addition to its basic purpose of protection of universities, their professors and their students the academic freedom has three time-specific purposes:
First, it calls for development of a unified European intellectual space and a unified research area as the basic tools to give the full strength to the creative potential of Europe.
Second, its purpose is to enable a comprehensive discussion with a view to the necessary reforms of teaching, so that both employability of university graduates and their ability to operate in a problem solving mode is assured.
Third, and perhaps the most important, the academic freedom today should produce new and exciting models of global academic cooperation and the role of Europe as a key agent creativity and development at the global level.
Is all this doable? Can these purposes of academic freedom be realized in our lifetime? I believe that, yes, it is doable and it should be. In fact, only success in the realization of these purposes guarantees an appropriate positioning of Europe in the future world.