https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0974-5346
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Universities striving for reputational gains in the competitive global higher education market rely on international rankings that claim to meaningfully identify ‘world class’ institutions. These rankings turn a blind eye to varying levels of academic freedom. We explore the origin of the first global university ranking in Shanghai, China, and argue that the current system of academic reputation management has been tailored to advance the interests of an authoritarian regime. From a human rights perspective, we argue that the notion of academic reputation should be reconciled with academic freedom. We also show how data from the new Academic Freedom Index (AFi) could inform international rankings and discuss other avenues for introducing a rights-perspective into academic reputation politics. The article includes ideas for how scholars, students, university administrations, funding organisations, and higher education policymakers can use the AFi to promote state compliance with the ‘freedom indispensable for scientific research’, which is a binding obligation under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 William A. Schabas, ed., The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: The “Travaux Préparatoires” (Cambridge University Press, 2013), 2722.
2 See §15 of the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), obliging signatory state parties to ‘respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research’, ratified by 171 UN member states. Full document available online: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1976/01/19760103%2009-57%20PM/Ch_IV_03.pdf.
3 David John Frank and John W. Meyer, The University and the Global Knowledge Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020), 9.
4 Elizabeth Gadd, ‘University Rankings Need a Rethink’, Nature 587, no. 7835 (2020): 523. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03312-2; Simon Marginson and Marijk van der Wende, ‘To Rank or To Be Ranked: The Impact of Global Rankings in Higher Education’, Journal of Studies in International Education 11, no. 3–4 (2007): 319ff.
5 We co-developed the Academic Freedom Index with Anna Lührmann and Staffan I. Lindberg from the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg; without their efforts and expertise, the Academic Freedom Index would not exist.
6 Parts of this article build on a report that we wrote jointly with the executive director of the Scholars at Risk Network: Katrin Kinzelbach, Ilyas Saliba, Janika Spannagel and Robert Quinn, ‘Free Universities. Putting the Academic Freedom Index into Action’ (GPPi, 2021): https://www.gppi.net/media/KinzelbachEtAl_2021_Free_Universities_AFi-2020.pdf. We want to thank Robert Quinn for many insightful conversations over the years. We also thank Jonathan Grayson for editorial support.
7 Alexander Cooley, ‘The emerging politics of international rankings and ratings’, in Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance, eds. Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 9.
8 Ibid., 10.
9 Sally Engle Merry, ‘Measuring the World: Indicators, Human Rights, and Global Governance’, Current Anthropology 52, no. S3 (2011): S83–S95.
10 Heike Jöns and Michael Hoyler, ‘Global Geographies of Higher Education: The Perspective of World University Rankings’, Geoforum 46 (May 2013): 45–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.12.014.
11 Ibid, 50.
12 Cesar Bacani, ‘Asia’s Top Universities’, Asiaweek, 1999, edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/universities/index99.html#more.
13 Peggy Sito, ‘Sino Land Follos Trend’, South China Morning Post, December 3, 1999, https://www.scmp.com/article/301477/sino-land-follows-trend; Netbig.com was later renamed as China Education Group, which continues to be led by Charles Huang: see https://chinaedugrp.com/ceg_about.html.
14 Paul Mooney, ‘The Road to Excellence’, Asiaweek, 2000, edition.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/features/universities2000/artic_china.html.
15 ‘The Ministry of Education Does Not Approve of a Simple Comprehensive University Ranking’ [教育部不赞成对高校进行简单综合排名], You Xiayin, China News Agency, June 15, 2000, http://edu.sina.com.cn/edu/2000-06-15/4583.shtml and ‘The Rankings of Colleges and Universities cause Another Storm, Renmin University graduates sue Netbig’ [高校排行榜又引风波 人大毕业生状告网大], Changjiang Daily [长江日报], August 17, 2000, http://edu.sina.com.cn/edu/2000-08-17/10240.shtml.
16 ‘CPPCC Member Huang Yinhui Points out That University Ranking Mislead Candidates’ [政协委员黄因慧指出“大学排名”误导考生], March 10, 2003, available at: http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2003-03-10/0344939824.shtml.
17 Nian Cai Liu, ‘The Story of Academic Rankings’, International Higher Education 54 (2009): 2–3, https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/ihe/article/view/8409/7543.
18 ‘Notice of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology Committee on Approving the Establishment of a Strategic Research Base of the Ministry of Education’ [教育部科学技术委员会关于批准建立教育部战略研究基地的通知], December 24, 2004, available at: https://www.pkulaw.com/chl/b9db3a1fbe6c160fbdfb.html.
19 Nian Cai Liu, ‘The Story of Academic Rankings’.
20 Ellen Hazelkorn, ‘Rankings and the Global Reputation Race’, New Directions for Higher Education 2014, no. 168: 15, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/he.20110 (accessed June 28, 2021).
21 Heike Jöns and Michael Hoyler, ‘Global Geographies of Higher Education’; Hazelkorn, ‘Rankings’, 13.
22 Mooney, ‘The Road to Excellence’.
23 Marginson and van der Wende, ‘To Rank or To Be Ranked’, 308.
24 Mooney, ‘The Road to Excellence’.
25 Philip G. Altbach, ‘The Costs and Benefits of World-Class Universities’, Academe 90, no. 1 (2004): 20–3, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ727445.
26 Ben Sowter, ‘The Times Higher Education Supplement and Quacquarelli Symonds (THES – QS) World University Rankings: New Developments in Ranking Methodology’, Higher Education in Europe 33, no. 2–3 (2008): 345–47, https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720802254247.
27 Furthermore, both rankings organise a number of events and conferences attended by higher education policymakers, university administrators, and industry for which they charge fees.
28 Igor Chirikov, ‘Does Conflict of Interest Distort Global University Rankings?’, Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher Education, Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.5.2021, (2021). Available online (last accessed on 29.06.2021): https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8hk672nh.
29 Elizabeth Gadd, Richard Holmes, and Justin Shearer, ‘Developing a Method for Evaluating Global University Rankings’, Scholarly Assessment Reports 3, no. 1 (2021): 2, http://doi.org/10.29024/sar.31.
30 Gadd, ‘University Rankings Need a Rethink’, 522: Gadd, Holmes, and Shearer, ‘Developing a Method’; Sowter, ‘New Developments’; Alex Usher, ‘A Short Global History of Rankings’, in Global Rankings and the Geopolitics of Higher Education: Understanding the Influence and Impact of Rankings on Higher Education, ed. Ellen Hazelkorn (Policy and Society; Taylor & Francis, 2016), https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315738550.
31 Gadd, Holmes, and Shearer, ‘Developing a Method’.
32 Frans A. van Vught and Frank Ziegele, eds., Multidimensional Ranking: The Design and Development of U-Multirank (Springer Netherlands: Higher Education Dynamics, 2012), https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3005-2.
33 We thank one of our anonymous reviewers for raising this important point.
34 Ellen Hazelkorn, ‘Rankings and the Global Reputation Race’, 22.
35 Ellen Hazelkorn and Martin Ryan, ‘The Impact of University Rankings on Higher Education Policy in Europe: A Challenge to Perceived Wisdom and a Stimulus for Change’, in The Globalization Challenge for European Higher Education: Convergence and Diversity, eds. Pavel Zgaga, Ulrich Teichler, and John Brennan (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2013).
36 Ellen Hazelkorn, ‘The Impact of League Tables and Ranking Systems on Higher Education Decision Making’, Higher Education Management and Policy, 19, no. 2, OECD Publishing, (2007): 1–24.
37 Gadd, ‘University Rankings Need a Rethink’, 523.
39 Jannis Grimm and Ilyas Saliba, ‘Free Research in Fearful Times: Conceptualizing an Index to Monitor Academic Freedom’, Interdisciplinary Political Studies 3, no. 1(2017): 41–75.; Janika Spannagel, ‘The Perks and Hazards of Data Sources on Academic Freedom: An Inventory’, in Researching Academic Freedom. Guidelines and Sample Case Studies, ed. Katrin Kinzelbach : (Erlangen: FAU University Press, 2020).
40 Daniel Pemstein et al. ‘The V-Dem Measurement Model: Latent Variable Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-Temporal Expert-Coded Data’. V-Dem Working Paper No. 21, 6th edition (2021). University of Gothenburg: Varieties of Democracy (2021). Institute; Michael Coppedge et al. ‘V-Dem Dataset v11.1’ Varieties of Democracy Project (2021).
41 For online graphing, see: https://www.v-dem.net/en/online-graphing/; all data is available here: https://doi.org/10.23696/vdemds21.
42 The horizontal line in a boxplot represents the median value; the box encompasses the first and third quartile of the data (i.e. the medians of the upper and lower half of the dataset); and the lines (whiskers) extend from the box to the highest or lowest value within 1.5 times the interquartile range, excluding outliers.
43 Two such examples are https://universitas21.com/rankings and https://www.topuniversities.com/system-strength-rankings/2018?utm_source=topnav.
44 Due to the lack of more disaggregated data on academic freedom in the AFi, we have additionally developed case study guidelines that allow for a systematic qualitative assessment and more nuanced analyses taking differences between scientific disciplines, regions, ownership structure etc. into account. See: Katrin Kinzelbach, ed., Researching Academic Freedom. Guidelines and Sample Case Studies (FAU University Press, 2020).
45 An alternative inclusion of AFi data alongside the other indicators in the calculation of the ranking score would, in contrast, allow some universities to be penalised while some would benefit from the same AFi score depending on their performance on the other indicators. This would mean that very low-ranking universities would be upgraded even with a low AFi score. The dynamic penalty included by the ex-post inclusion of AFi data would avoid such a distortion.
46 This proposal has been made by John Fitzgerald: https://www.jpolrisk.com/chinese-scholars-are-calling-for-freedom-and-autonomy-how-should-western-universities-respond/.
47 Jannis Grimm, Kevin Koehler, Ellen M. Lust, Ilyas Saliba, and Isabell Schierenbeck, Safer Field Research in the Social Sciences: A Guide to Human and Digital Security in Hostile Environments (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2020), 129–35.
48 Ibid.
49 Research guidelines for detailed country case studies are available in Kinzelbach, Researching Academic Freedom.
50 Note in particular the Academic Freedom Monitoring Project of the Scholars at Risk network: https://www.scholarsatrisk.org/actions/academic-freedom-monitoring-project/.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Katrin Kinzelbach
Katrin Kinzelbach is a professor of political science at FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg, where she teaches the international politics of human rights. Her ongoing work focuses on academic freedom infringements worldwide and she has a particular interest in the People’s Republic of China. She gratefully acknowledges a research grant from the German Volkswagen Foundation for the continuation of the Academic Freedom Index, awarded jointly to Katrin Kinzelbach and Staffan I. Lindberg, director of the V-Dem Institute.
Ilyas Saliba
Ilyas Saliba is currently completing his PhD at Humboldt University Berlin. He is a research fellow at both the Research Unit Democracy and Democratization at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center and the Global Public Policy Institute’s (GPPi) team on human rights and democracy.
Janika Spannagel
Janika Spannagel researches academic freedom contestations at Freie Universität Berlin. She is also a non-resident fellow at the Global Public Policy Institute. The systematization of data on international human rights topics is one of her key research interests. She is about to conclude her PhD research at the University of Freiburg on the international protection of human rights defenders.