Two-fifths of union representatives at Norwegian universities believe that academic freedom has “weakened” over the past five years,?, while two-thirds say their institution does too little to train on and raise awareness of academic freedom and a fifth believe their university does not adequately safeguard their ability to “express themselves freely” in the public sphere.
The Norwegian Association of Researchers (NAR) surveyed more than 200 union representatives across 35 universities and colleges, asking them to assess the academic freedom protections at their institution.
Only 12 per cent of respondents said they were aware of “well-functioning routines” put in place to protect researchers “exposed to undue pressure or harassment as a result of disseminating research and knowledge”, with the remainder saying such procedures existed “only in places” or did not exist as far as they were aware.
“The challenges to academic freedom worldwide are a concern for Norwegian academics and students,” NAR special adviser Jon Wikene Iddeng told?Times Higher Education. “There is a growing sense that academic freedom is under pressure in Norway as well, especially regarding free speech and participation in public discourse.”
Dr Iddeng said academic freedom was typically “well protected” in Norway; indeed, the Universities and Colleges Act states that institutions “promote and protect academic freedom and those who exercise it”. Potential threats to this freedom, however, included a “dependence on external funding” as well as “hardening of the public debate”, he said.
Early career researchers were particularly vulnerable to infringements on their academic freedom, Dr Iddeng said, because of their financial precarity and dependence on “senior gatekeepers” within the research community. Scholars researching “controversial subjects or critical studies on national policies or business conduct” were also “vulnerable to threats and pressure,” he said, adding: “Studies confirm that many accordingly back off from participating in public debates and some even withdraw from further studies on the subject.”
The survey’s most striking finding, Dr Iddeng said, was “the shared view that the universities do little to educate their employees and the public in the core values and necessity of academic freedom for a free and democratic society, and too little to protect scholars against harassment or outside pressure.
“Even though there are good examples of academic leaders that defend their staff in such cases, many are not attentive of the pressure academics might feel when a media storm hits them.”
In response, he said, universities must “develop courses for all employees in academic freedom” while also educating the general public on the subject. Institutions should also “establish routines to protect academics targeted for their work, avoid temporary contracts, and make sure to establish collegial governance where academic staff have a real say in research and teaching decisions”.
Dr Iddeng called on the Norwegian government to deepen legal protections for researchers beyond those offered by the Universities and Colleges Act. “We urge our parliament to include the protection of academic freedom, in particular the freedom of scientific research, into the Norwegian constitution,” he said.
