“Fairly good” is not good enough

Academic freedom is a key principle of the Finnish scientific community, and it is protected by the Constitution and specified by the Universities Act. It covers freedom of research and teaching, freedom of speech for researchers, and social interaction between universities. Although a recent survey has assessed the status of academic freedom in Finland to be fairly good, a significant proportion of researchers feel that it has deteriorated in recent years. This raises concern, as academic freedom should be absolute, not just ‘fairly good’.

Approximately half of the respondents to the survey consider that academic freedom has decreased in the last two years. In particular, this is seen to be due to the social climate becoming increasingly tense, the disparagement of research, and the increase in political and economic control. The changes are often not direct legal restrictions, yet they have an indirect but significant impact on the operating environment of researchers.

Pressure from both outside and inside the research community

Funders and political actors were identified as the biggest limiting factors. Research is increasingly being directed towards economically useful or current themes, which weakens the position of basic research. Competitive financing, performance management and strategic emphases increase dependence on external interests and make long-term, researcher-oriented work more difficult.

The internal structures of universities also affect academic freedom. Hierarchical leadership and organisational culture can increase the pressure of uniformity, which is particularly emphasised in the uncertain position of young researchers. At the same time, those working in research institutions and universities of applied sciences experience the lack of academic freedom even more clearly, as their operations are more strongly guided by political and strategic control.

Fear drives to self-censorship, support measures are insufficient

Restrictions are also experienced in teaching, where administrative requirements and student expectations can affect the contents of the education. Some teachers say they avoid controversial topics because of fear of conflict. The freedom of speech of researchers is assessed as fairly good, but a significant proportion of researchers feel that there are shortcomings. In particular, researchers communicating on certain social topics face harassment, threats, and campaigns.

Almost one fifth of the respondents have experienced restrictions on freedom of speech, and many have changed their behaviour as a result. This manifests itself, for example, in limiting research topics, avoiding public debate, or being cautious in communication. Fear of harassment and consequences leads to self-censorship, which has a broad impact on the entire scientific community.

Even though support measures have been developed, some researchers feel that they are left without sufficient support. As solutions, the Committee for Public Information proposes the establishment of a national support organisation, the extension of the employer’s duty to protect along with the inclusion of science communication and self-protection against harassment in researcher training.