“Universities are more than just places of learning”

Universities help secure a skilled workforce, foster innovation and strengthen democracy and regional development. But to what extent are they independent of political influence? Sociologist Prof. Philipp Pohlenz discusses academic freedom, state regulation and the future of the higher education landscape in Saxony-Anhalt.

How important are universities for Saxony-Anhalt?

A vibrant and regionally diverse higher education landscape is of particular importance to Saxony-Anhalt. Saxony-Anhalt is at the epicentre of demographic change, which – due to the current generation retiring in a few years’ time – will create a massive skills shortage.

At the same time, the state’s economy is characterised by small and medium-sized enterprises. Many of them are unable to establish their own research and innovation structures. Collaboration with universities, in their role as drivers of innovation, is vital for the regional economy.

Furthermore, universities outside the major cities are also centres of culture, scientific communication and social exchange. Given declining participation in politics and culture, it is crucial to preserve these centres of knowledge throughout the state.

How can a state government influence universities?

Education, science and culture are sovereign responsibilities of state government. State parliaments enact higher education legislation and approve the budgets of higher education institutions. The governance of universities is therefore part of day-to-day state politics. However, universities are autonomous in deciding for themselves on the content of their research and teaching. Political governance is achieved through the joint conclusion of target agreements and, as mentioned, through the allocation of the core budget.

What does academic freedom mean in the day-to-day running of universities?

Academic freedom is a prerequisite for the academic system to function. Politically directed academia is not innovative. It runs the risk of producing complacent reports and merely confirming what political decision-makers already believe.

Academic freedom, however, means being able to speak freely about uncomfortable truths once these have been established as such in the process of knowledge production, underpinned by scientific procedures such as peer review.

Where does legitimate political governance end and where does undue influence begin?

Ministries are tasked with monitoring the proper use of public funds. They may also set priorities, for example through performance agreements negotiated jointly with universities.

This is, however, quite different from politically delegitimising certain areas of research or dictating the subject matter that science is permitted to address. In a liberal-democratic system, universities themselves decide which topics are relevant for research and teaching.

Historically, however, university autonomy is by no means a given. Until the 1990s, universities were subject to much tighter control by the ministries responsible for science. Even today, politicians are involved in general university planning. As universities use public funds, they must be accountable for how they are spent. However, this does not justify political control over academic content.

Must universities be politically neutral?

The question of neutrality is debated not only in political circles but also within the academic community. Particularly in disciplines such as the social sciences, which also deal with social conflicts, one could argue that it is virtually impossible for an academic to refrain from making judgements.

The same applies, however, to the natural sciences, which are often perceived as detached and neutral. In medicine, for example, the question arises as to who defines what constitutes a disease. Such definitions are based not only on research but also on societal notions of normality.

How can universities address controversial topics without taking a partisan stance?

When dealing with major societal challenges, different perspectives must be taken into account. At the same time, a distinction must be made between established scientific knowledge and its political application.

The fact that climate change is real, for example, is regarded as a scientifically established fact. What is politically controversial, however, is which measures are appropriate for adaptation or climate protection.

When science communicates established findings publicly, it is therefore not automatically acting in a partisan manner. Science provides findings and highlights possible consequences. It is up to politicians to take responsibility for the political decisions that follow.

What happens when political majorities seek to undermine certain fields of research or study programs?

Changing political majorities inevitably lead to new priorities. This is part of democratic governance.

However, ideologically motivated interference in university autonomy would destabilise the social system. Science, politics, business and culture each fulfil their own roles and follow different logics. The role of science is to seek the truth and drive innovation.

If science is controlled in terms of content and reshaped by politics, it loses its capacity for innovation and its significance as a forum where societal problems are identified and solutions developed.

What would be the consequences of a return to a state-level diploma?

An independent Saxony-Anhalt degree would have serious consequences. Problems would not arise only in other European countries, but already within the German higher education and labour markets.

Graduates might face difficulties if their degree were not readily recognised in other federal states. The appeal of Saxony-Anhalt as a centre of higher education would suffer considerably if students had to fear that their degree would be of limited use outside the state.

The consequences would be devastating not only internationally, but also within Germany’s higher education system, which is organised across 16 federal states: a graduate holding a Saxony-Anhalt degree who tries to find a job in Bavaria would probably face difficulties. She wouldn’t even need to try her luck in other European countries. The appeal of Saxony-Anhalt’s higher education system would collapse because nobody would want to enrol on a study program whose degree is not recognised outside Saxony-Anhalt, or whose recognition within Saxony-Anhalt’s economy is equally up in the air.

What is your view on tuition fees for international students?

The German higher education system is probably not attractive to international students solely because it is comparatively inexpensive. Tuition fees would therefore not necessarily lead to an immediate slump in demand.

However, Germany faces increasing international competition for talented students and young professionals. If fees were to act as a deterrent, the financial damage could outweigh the additional revenue. Germany might well fall behind in terms of international student mobility.

That said, tuition fees are also controversial for entirely different reasons and have failed to gain acceptance following various attempts, but that is a separate discussion.

What should voters look out for if higher education policy issues are important to them?

The parties’ views on science and education policy are publicly available in their election manifestos and government programmes. No one can therefore claim later that they were unaware of the planned policy directions.

Regardless of one’s own political priorities, one should assess whether the proposals will enable a sustainable educational landscape. Key criteria include the international competitiveness and visibility of universities, as well as their capacity for innovation in research and teaching.

 Thank you very much for the interview!