Increase support for public-facing academics, universities urged

Public trust in science is stable despite prevailing narratives but there are divides along political, religious and generational lines, researchers have told European University Association (EUA) conference.

Speaking at the event in Istanbul, Niels Mede, assistant professor of science communication at Wageningen University in the Netherlands, presented data from his study which looked at 68 countries around the world and found trust in science was moderately high despite media narratives and a widespread sentiment among academics that it was in decline.

European countries sit slightly below the world average, but Mede said this reflected healthy institutional scepticism.

“Scientists in African countries or Asian countries, are perceived [to be] even more trustworthy because they may represent trustworthy alternatives to corrupt elites, such as politicians,” he said. “We have little corruption in European countries. The public tend to be more critical of public institutions.”

But Mede told Times Higher Education that scientists and universities in many European countries had increasingly become a part of political debates, which undermined their perceived trustworthiness among the public.

“For example, if scientists speak out against politically contested issues such as climate change, health, vaccination, gender studies, this makes them vulnerable to enjoying less trust, in at least part of the population,” he said.

Mede stressed that universities should step up the support they offer to academics who were vocal as many are left alone to face the consequences. “Every scientist should feel prepared and skilled and resilient enough to step out into the public sphere. They should be given enough training and support, and funding for scientists who may suffer backlash,” he added.

His research also found that between 20 and 25 per cent of people do not believe scientists are open to feedback or transparent in their work. “The lesson here is that universities may want to be more open to the public, seek dialogue and engagement,” he said.

Trust is also unevenly distributed. Older and more highly educated people tend to trust scientists more, while those with conservative views show lower levels of trust. “Public trust is fragmented and divided along sociopolitical and religious beliefs,” he said.

The theme of this year’s conference is university cooperation in changing contexts. Josep Maria Garrell, president of the EUA, said the value of cooperation was coming under question.

“Higher education institutions engage in all types of partnerships, between institutions, with the public sector, with industry and other partners, at local, national and international level. But the value of cooperation, so evident to us, is increasingly being called into question,” he said.

“So we wanted to look at how, in times of polarisation, populism and multiplying crises, relationships between universities, governments and the public can be strengthened. Protecting academic freedom and university autonomy are key for this; but so is institutional introspection and reflection on universities’ own role in building trust.”

Maximilian Conrad, professor of political science at the University of Iceland, drew on his findings from a Horizon Europe-funded project called Reclaiming Liberal Democracy in a Post-Factual Age, a €3 million (£2.3 million) study that looked at 13 countries.

“Populism creates a binary divide between elites and the people, with science and journalism constructed as part of the corrupt elite,” he said. “Science is framed as politically biased, but more fundamentally as a matter of opinion that is no more valid than any other opinion.”

Conrad said universities should respond to such a climate by engaging more in public life, not less.

“Universities can play a role by being present in the public sphere, not withdraw from it. Now, if ever, is the time to communicate the findings in the public sphere to show what research is being done, what kind of factual basis it provides for political discussions.”

seher.asaf@timeshighereducation.com