Hans Adolfsson: Academic freedom and institutional autonomy

Almost a year ago, the Government presented the current research and innovation bill, Forskning och innovation för framtid, nyfikenhet och nytta (“Research and innovation for the future, curiosity and benefit”) (Prop. 2024/24:60). In addition to numerous research and research infrastructure initiatives, the bill contains commitments to launch a number of inquiries. Among these is an inquiry intended to propose measures to strengthen the protection of academic freedom for teachers and researchers. This inquiry was prompted by the Swedish Higher Education Authority’s (UKÄ’s) report “Academic Freedom in Sweden” from 2024, through which the Government identified a homogeneity and uniformity within academic environments at our higher education institutions, and an aversion to conducting research in certain areas, partly due to internal influence from colleagues, but also due to researchers being subjected direct threats, hostility and harassment due to their choice of research area. The inquiry was appointed last spring, with Professor Anna-Sara Lind from Uppsala University as the investigator. She is expected to submit a report by the summer of 2026. During the autumn, the inquiry has conducted and is continuing to conduct a number of dialogue meetings and interviews to map the actual threat to individual academic freedom at our higher education institutions. It is interesting to note that the factors that the UKÄ report primarily cites as having a negative impact on individual academic freedom are political control and influence, as well as research funding and the research funding system.

A further inquiry announced in the bill concerns “analysing the appropriateness of the current form of governance for state universities and colleges”. The Government considers it “important that the state’s governance of universities and colleges is appropriate in such a way that it provides good conditions for the higher education institutions to perform their mandated role, i.e. conducting high-quality research and education”. The Government’s proposal to review the organisational form is a good one, especially considering the current geopolitical uncertainty and social polarisation, which in recent years has resulted in higher education institutions around the world being subjected to various forms of political pressure. When the proposal to appoint an inquiry into the form of association of higher education institutions was discussed in the Swedish Parliament’s Committee on Education, it became clear that there was no parliamentary consensus on the need for such an inquiry. The Government has nevertheless announced that the inquiry will go ahead, and in the autumn we learned that the terms of reference for such an inquiry are being discussed and considered by the Ministry of Education and Research. In our eastern neighbour Finland, such a reform to the form of governance was implemented 15 years ago, resulting in the majority of Finnish universities being made independent corporations under public law – public universities. To learn more about what the reform has meant for Finnish universities, I accompanied the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions’ (SUHF’s) expert group for analysis on a visit to Helsinki, where we met representatives from the universities in Helsinki, Tampere and Vaasa, as well as Aalto University, which became a foundation university in connection with the reform. It is quite clear that the reform has brought about several changes that have strengthened the autonomy of higher education institutions in relation to governance by both the state and other actors. As independent corporations under public law, Finnish universities have, for example, the right to decide on their own academic structures and can enter into agreements and contracts, own movable and immovable property, and establish legal entities. Higher education institutions also have the right to build up capital themselves in order to be able to implement various strategic initiatives. At the same time, it emerged that, at the same time as the institutions’ autonomy increased, the Finnish government introduced a detailed indicator-based resource allocation system that puts the institutions in fierce competition with each other and thus has a significant controlling effect on their activities.

What can we learn from this? An inquiry investigating the appropriateness of the current form of governance for most of Sweden’s universities and colleges is a highly welcome initiative. At the same time, if we wish to achieve true institutional autonomy and control, the entire governance system needs to be reviewed, including both the legal protection of academic freedom and how resources are allocated to higher education institutions. I look forward to finding that particular Christmas present under the tree.

This text is written by President Hans Adolfsson. It appears in the section “Words from the Management”, in which members of the university’s management team take turns to write about topical issues. The section appears in News for staff which is distributed to the entirety of the University staff.