Call for universities to push to decouple from the state

Research universities should be leading demands for a greater level of autonomy, according to a new paper written by the former rector of Uppsala University, Professor Eva Åkesson, which asks: “Are Swedish universities rigged for increased autonomy? Or too fearful?”

The paper is a product of the CALIE project: the Sweden-USA Project for Collaboration, Academic Leadership and Innovation in Higher Education.

The project involves the four major Swedish universities, Stockholm, Lund, Uppsala and Gothenburg (the SLUG universities), and is run in collaboration with Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley and University of Washington – and has been funded from 1 April 2019 to 31 December 2021 by Vinnova, Sweden’s innovation agency.

Some 250 leaders from the universities participate in seminars, conferences and the exchange of discussion papers. These include one recently published edited collection of studies and 11 discussion papers addressing issues “to strengthen the potential for higher education and research to respond to pressing societal challenges and so-called ‘wicked problems’”.

As the vice-rector and pro-rector of Lund University from 2003-11 and rector of Uppsala University from 2012-20, Professor Åkesson has 18 years of experience in top university leadership at two of the largest research-intensive universities in Sweden, so many people will be interested to hear her thoughts, published in her paper on 11 November, on how much autonomy universities really have.

She says that universities themselves have to act now and come forward with demands.

“The next common project after CALIE ought to be one where the [four research-intensive] universities are allowed to make a pilot of a new public legalisation ground as autonomous universities. Greater responsibilities are needed today to conquer greater autonomy tomorrow – do not expect that others will do this on your behalf!” Åkesson said.

Her paper (in Swedish) discusses university autonomy and asks whether Swedish universities are properly equipped for the future or if they may be too scared to embrace a larger degree of freedom.

A brief account on recent reforms, internationalisation and the impact and possibilities of the European Universities Initiative is presented. Three suggestions are put forward to the four universities participating in the CALIE project: Create a joint University Observatory, use European Universities wisely – and do it together, and develop a proposal on independent universities and be a pilot.

New winds for European universities

“New winds are blowing in Europe after [French President Emmanuel] Macron’s speech in September 2017 in Sorbonne on his vision for European universities. Are the EU’s European Universities Initiative, together with the new university law, the new triggers for change?” she asked.

She said that 11 Swedish universities are participating in the first two pilot rounds of the European Universities Initiative and that several attractive common projects are under way.

She characterised the European University Initiative as a success, where small incentives might lead to surprising results, but to move beyond sparking ideas to create lasting and significant change, some challenging obstacles need to be removed and thresholds for mobilisation lowered.

“The honeymoon for the European University Initiative is coming to an end,” she said, quoting the report of the League of European Research Universities, which said: “European Universities: no more lip service, time for action.”

It said: “A crucial role for member states to play in the success story of the European University Initiative is the removal of barriers that hamper cross-border collaboration, joint degrees and the setup of legal entities.”

Networking requires parliament approval

Åkesson explains in her paper how difficult it was for Uppsala University to be a co-founder and member of the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities network, a struggle which she sees as reflecting the university’s low level of autonomy.

For a Swedish university to take part in the founding of a university network in the form of a not-for-profit organisation with headquarters in Belgium, a decision in Sweden’s parliament is needed, Åkesson said.

“In spite of maximum efforts and goodwill by everybody involved, it took six months’ handling and preparations to secure a decision in parliament that made possible Uppsala University’s membership in this important European network, four months after the formal constitution.

“It is easy to agree that universities should be able to handle this type of question themselves – if a minimum level of trust is given to a government university in Sweden,” she said.

Göran Melin, an educational expert at the Technopolis Group in Stockholm, told University World News: “Eva Åkesson may very well have a valid point. For a long time, academic leadership at Swedish higher education institutions has been characterised by a desire to please the ministry rather than developing strong and unique profiles of the institutions.

“Exceptions exist, but in general this pattern has a negative impact on the development of the autonomy of the institutions.”

He said a study to investigate what impact the European Universities Initiative has had so far is just about to be launched by the European Commission and its results will be of great interest.

Lennart Ståhle, a former director at the Ministry of Education and Science and former deputy university chancellor of Sweden, told University World News: “We have discussed autonomy for universities over the past 30 years or more without any concrete results.”

He said Sweden has the ‘Chalmers model’, referring to the Chalmers University of Technology, which since 1994 has been a private university, owned by the Chalmers University of Technology Foundation. It is a model which is followed by a number of other institutions, such as the Stockholm School of Economics.

“The biggest obstacle is perhaps the economic issues and also distrust and disinterest from the government or politicians who think it is working so why change? Universities must be more explicit in what kind of autonomy they expect.”

Professor Ole Petter Ottersen, president of Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, told University World News: “Institutional autonomy is a prerequisite for creativity, flexibility and innovativeness – those very features that make universities into institutions that shape the future while still responding to current needs and challenges.

“In fact, the social responsibility of universities is easily curtailed by political control and regulation which will necessarily be dictated by short-term needs rather than by the long-term gains of independence and freedom.

“Autonomy is also essential if universities are to continue to serve as critics of society – a condition sine qua non for societal development.”

He agrees that there is a need to instil increased awareness of the value of institutional autonomy and that universities must be trusted and not subjected to unproductive political interference.

“In our age of geopolitical turbulence, it is particularly important that institutional autonomy is not sacrificed on the altar of protectionism and self-reliance: universities should be free to keep up and bolster international collaborative networks even if there is a loss of trust in diplomatic channels.

“The hurdles that Uppsala University experienced when seeking to enter an international university network remind us that even in Sweden we could do better when it comes to the issue of safeguarding institutional autonomy.”

University World News asked Åkesson if she is thinking about a decoupled Swedish university system modelled after Chalmers University of Technology, where the institution’s activities are governed by a long-term agreement with the Swedish government, supplemented by annual agreements.

Chalmers is an aktiebolag (stock company) with 100 shares at SEK1,000 (US$111), all of which are owned by the Chalmers University of Technology Foundation, a private foundation, which appoints the university board and the president. Most of the foundation’s board members are appointed by the Swedish government (4 to 8 seats), the departments appoint one member, the student union appoints one member and the president automatically takes his or her place as the chair.

Åkesson said: “Yes, I do think the universities ought to consider a model like Chalmers or a model like the one suggested in 2008 by a special commission, with Professor Daniel Tarschys as responsible, that the higher education institutions should no longer be state agencies.

“The idea was that another public form of organisation should be created. I hope the universities now have the guts to take up the gauntlet thrown down at them.”

Professor Daniel Tarschys from Stockholm University told University World News that his proposal for greater university autonomy made in a white paper to parliament was applauded by large parts of the university community but also met with scepticism and hesitation from others who were fearful of declining government support for higher education.

“The political response was lukewarm. As of today, Swedish universities and other institutions of higher education (with a few exceptions) continue to be regular government agencies, which does not give them an adequate degree of independence. Institutional reform is still called for.”

Linn Svärd, president of the Swedish National Union of Students (SFS), which represents 350,000 students including doctoral students, told University World News it supports an increase in academic freedom and autonomy in research and education in Sweden, but this did not necessarily require changing to a new form of self-governed institution.

“What is most crucially needed is a strengthening of academic freedom through the Swedish constitution, and a less detailed regulation through the Higher Education Ordinance. Such changes would apply equally to both public-sector and foundational higher education institutions, the two form of higher education institutions that currently exist within the Swedish system.”

She said there is no evidence that a more independent form of governance would automatically increase the level of educational freedom.

The majority of universities are technically government bodies within the public sector, but there are a handful of higher education institutions in the form of independent foundations. Both public-sector and foundational higher education institutions have a certain level of autonomy: They regulate their internal organisation and the allocation of funds within the institution, as well as all hiring except for the rector and the board.

Both public-sector and the foundational higher education institutions obtain their degree-awarding authorisation from the same government agency, (Universitetskanslersämbetet or UKÄ). The public-sector institutions are fully subject to the Swedish Higher Education Act, while the foundational institutions are subject only to certain parts of the act.

However, in both forms of higher education institution, education is publicly funded in full. In the case of the foundations, funding is guaranteed through a contract between the foundation and the state.

“The two forms of governance are comparable in terms of educational freedom. The threats to academic freedom lie elsewhere,” Svärd said.

She said SFS represent members from both public-sector and foundational higher education institutions.

“The conditions for student unions and student influence are more clearly defined and to some extent better guaranteed within the public-sector higher education institutions. This, however, is not inherent to the form of governance and could be handled through changes in the Higher Education Act.”