Can universities help to solve global challenges? This was the central question at ERUA’s Fourth Annual Summit 2024 in Vilnius, Lithuania in June 2024. The distinguished meeting of thought leaders, academics, policymakers, and innovators, including Dr. Hilligje van’t Land, Secretary General of the International Association of Universities (IAU), explored higher education’s role in social innovation, including when addressing issues like climate change and social inequality. Dr. van’t Land shared her insights on how universities can adapt to a changing world (and as well influence it). In this interview, she also reflects on the ongoing debate about challenges and opportunities offered by university rankings.

Enthusiastic about the insights and dynamics of the ERUA Alliance meeting, Dr. Hilligje van’t Land emphasizes the importance of consolidifying the alliance and its alignment with the conference theme of social innovation: “I think this meeting is essential to celebrate the establishment of the alliance, to consolidate and confirm it. The link between ERUA’s mission and the theme chosen for this conference on social innovation is magnificent. It really is an opportunity to combine points of view, to explore and advance societal innovation through interdisciplinarity, connecting different disciplines within an institution and within the 8 universities from across Europe that form part of the ERUA network,” she says.

Is Artificial Intelligence a Challenge for the Future of Universities?

With global challenges multiplying, universities have an opportunity to deliver on their fundamental mission - making a significant contribution to society. For example, the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) looms large in today’s society, often leading to questioning its potential negative impacts and less the opportunities it comes with. Considering the future of universities in the light of AI development, Dr. Hilligje van’t Land argues:

“Artificial intelligence will always be artificial. Is it intelligent? It connects a wide range of theories and techniques from across the world and allows to create machines that are aiming at simulating human intelligence; it connects information including language processing systems available online from across the planet (still largely in English yet increasingly in many other languages). Instead of being afraid of it, we should look at the opportunities that it offers.” She believes the university should prioritize integrating ethical considerations and human values into AI development and to ensure that the expert systems it compiles or generates embrace the diversity that is human.

How is the privatization of research impacting intellectual freedom within universities?

While respectful AI development brings opportunities in certain scientific fields, universities grapple with other challenges, such as securing adequate research funding, crucial for advancement. H. van’t Land highlights the problems universities face in securing research funding:

“The education sector in general, and higher education in particular, suffers from full recognition of its value for society at government level. Politicians often believe universities should be self-sufficient, generating their own financial resources. As a result, universities are increasingly turning to the private sector to find the funding they need to finance research,” she says. Moreover, H. van’t Land criticizes the tendency of private funding concentrating on cutting-edge research:  

“From the point of view of the Board of Directors of the IAU, we regret this, because it too often means that research programs, that should be co-defined, are at times entirely defined by the corporate world and at times only for the benefit of the corporate world, while the expertise sought from the universities is financed by the public sector for the common good.” This kind of privatization of research may have severe impacts on intellectual freedom of the university researchers. H. van’t Land argues that governments must recognize that unrestrained privatization of research will have an effect on the very core of academic freedom – the autonomy of thought that universities embody. Policymakers should actively valorize the vital role universities play in civil society, a role that is fundamental to our shared future and support the sector politically and financially.

Should universities prioritize rankings?

However, government funding for universities is often tied to ranking systems, where higher placement in these rankings translates to securing additional funding. These ranking systems often rely on quantifiable factors, including the number of highly cited research papers in SCOPUS for instance or the number of alumni who have won Nobel Prizes. This situation raises the question: do university rankings truly capture a university’s impact on society? From the perspective of H. van’t Land:

“University rankings can be valuable when critically examined because of the wealth of data they collect and provide. By asking ourselves “what are we truly measuring and for what goal”, we can leverage these rankings for a more constructive purpose. Today, however, we are not quite there. The rise of rankings has unfortunately fostered a reactive culture within universities, where the primary focus is on collecting data, informing the rakings to climb the charts. Universities and other higher education institutions provide data to satisfy ranking metrics, yet rarely question them, why they are made or what and who they serve.”

The effectiveness of university rankings has however become a subject of critical inquiry among researchers, who are questioning their original aims. For example, Professor Chris Brink, Rector of Stellenbosch University in South Africa, criticizes the ranking systems, arguing that universities should shift their focus from 'what universities are good at' to 'what they are good for'. H. van’t Land extends this idea saying that from the moment universities look at what they’re good for, they are likely to move away from the current rankings or from rankings altogether.  Some universities have already openly announced to refuse to submit data to the rankings this year. Her point is that when universities prioritize societal contribution over rankings, their true value becomes evident.

The relentless focus on rankings threatens to distract universities from their core mission: educating students and addressing society’s most pressing needs. Perhaps it’s time for universities to better choose their priorities.

By Dr. Vilma Losytė, Science Communication Manager at Mykolas Romeris University