Understanding Academic Freedom and the EP Monitor 2025

Academic freedom, defined as the freedom of scholars and students to teach, research, express ideas, and participate in university governance without undue interference, stands as a cornerstone of higher education in democratic societies. It encompasses core elements like freedom to conduct research, teach, study, and disseminate findings, supported by institutional autonomy and self-governance. The European Parliament's (EP) Academic Freedom Monitor 2025, released in February 2026 by the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) for the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA), offers the latest comprehensive analysis of de facto academic freedom across all 27 EU Member States. This annual tool tracks trends using data from the Academic Freedom Index (AFI) by V-Dem, Freedom House reports, and Scholars at Risk (SAR) monitoring, combined with expert interviews and country-specific deep dives.

The monitor highlights that while the EU maintains relatively high levels of academic freedom globally, a gradual erosion persists, driven by multiple pressures. This report not only updates scores but delves into four key trends impacting universities: political polarisation, influences from U.S. higher education shifts, commercialisation through private funding, and foreign interference. For European university leaders, faculty, and students navigating these challenges, the findings underscore the need for vigilant protections to sustain innovative research and teaching.

Global Context and EU AFI Scores: A High but Declining Standard

According to the AFI, which measures academic freedom on a 0-1 scale across five sub-indicators—freedom to research and teach, academic exchange and dissemination, institutional autonomy, campus integrity, and academic/cultural expression—the EU average dropped from 0.93 in 2014 to 0.84 in 2024, a statistically significant decline of -0.09. This places the EU above global averages but below peak performers like Czechia (0.98, stable). Twenty-three Member States hold 'A' status (high freedom), with six in the global top 10, yet 16 countries showed deterioration, and eight experienced significant 10-year declines: Austria, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, and Portugal.

Hungary fares worst at 0.30, with sharp drops across all sub-indicators, including -1.19 in institutional autonomy due to government centralisation of funding and accreditation revocations (e.g., gender studies programs). Poland improved recently (+0.12 in 2024-2025) post-illiberal shifts but still lags with declines in four sub-indicators. High performers like Belgium rank globally strong, while Finland slipped from 13th to 45th amid budget cuts.

Scholars at Risk documented incidents like event cancellations in Germany (e.g., UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese at Free University Berlin due to security pressures) and clashes in France (Toulouse-Jean Jaurès University). These reflect broader threats to campus integrity and expression.

Trend 1: Political Polarisation Straining University Campuses

Political polarisation tops the monitor's concerns, fueling anti-science sentiments and intra-academic divides. Surveys show 52% of Europeans view scientists as potentially dangerous (up 6% since 2021), with divides on climate, vaccines, and geopolitics like Israel-Gaza. In Poland, protests and boycotts emerged over Gaza; Belgium saw 'woke activism' vs. free speech debates. Right-wing preferences for 'public will' over experts exacerbate self-censorship, especially post-illiberal transitions.

Universities face internal tensions: faculty harassment (30% online in Finland) and leadership pressures to align with politics. The rise of far-right parties like Germany's AfD, calling for gender studies closures, heightens unease for international students. To counter this, institutions should foster dialogue forums and leadership training, as recommended in the report.

Trend 2: U.S. Higher Education Shifts Rippling into Europe

Recent U.S. policies since January 2025—ending Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, NSF budget cuts (-56.9% proposed), and civil service reductions—threaten EU collaborations. Belgian and Finnish universities discontinued non-aligned funding, while data sovereignty risks loom in joint projects.

This 'soft power' shift offers Europe opportunities, like attracting U.S. talent fleeing restrictions, but warns against importing anti-academic agendas on climate or gender research. EU universities must prioritise data sovereignty and science diplomacy, linking to resources like crafting strong academic CVs for international mobility.

Trend 3: Commercialisation and Funding Pressures on Research Autonomy

Public funding stagnation forces reliance on private sources, risking agenda-setting, IP restrictions, and data suppression. Italy's R&D spend at 1.38% GDP (vs. EU 2.26%) exemplifies cuts leading to governance concentration via reforms like ANVUR board controls. The 'onion model' in the report outlines protections: core freedoms (research/teaching) demand proportionality in limits.

• Benefits: Innovation from partnerships.
• Risks: Subtle steering, employment insecurity.
• Solutions: Adequate public funding per UNESCO principles, procedural safeguards.

France and Germany show balanced approaches, but broader surveys are needed on private threats.

Trend 4: Foreign Interference, Especially from China

Foreign interference distinguishes 'influence' (transparent collaboration) from 'sharp power' (covert disruption). China leads concerns: 496 global Confucius Institutes (22.6% in EU, 31 HEIs), CSC scholarships with loyalty oaths (750+ Italy ties, 41.4% PLA-linked; 483 France, 93 high-risk 'Seven Sons').

Closures: 13 EU-wide (e.g., Frankfurt, Hamburg in Germany; Lyon, Nanterre in France). Responses vary: Italy's 'traffic light' system, France's PPST vetting, Germany's DLR OPERATE tool, Belgium's bans, Finland's security funding law. EU's 2025 Centre of Expertise aids risk assessments.

Other actors: Russia (Ukraine war), U.S. policies. Universities should implement due diligence and 'no-influence' clauses.

Spotlight on Key Countries: Challenges in Hungary, Poland, and Beyond

Hungary's systematic erosion stems from Orban-era controls: curriculum oversight, rector appointments, funding channelling—AFI crashes reflect revoked accreditations and self-censorship. Poland's recent gains mask lingering divides from PiS rule, with Gaza protests highlighting expression risks. Germany's 3 SAR cancellations (e.g., Benny Morris at Leipzig) tie to security pretexts amid AfD rise. France logs clashes and hall denials; Italy governance reforms and PRC ties; Finland austerity centralises power.

Stakeholders—from rectors to students—report heightened vigilance, with calls for EU-wide safeguards.

Policy Options: Pathways to Strengthen EU University Autonomy

The monitor reiterates 2024 options like an EU clearinghouse for data and integration into Horizon Europe/Erasmus+, adding:

• Risk-based strategies: Vulnerability assessments, cybersecurity, exit plans for collaborations.
• Counter-polarisation: Agency support, transparent funding guidelines.
• Funding boosts: Reverse cuts (e.g., Italy €550M shortfall), promote EU as freedom hub.
• Member State actions: Italy's €1.5bn allocation, France's penalties, Germany's decentralised tools.

These actionable insights empower universities to balance openness and security.

Photo by Kevin Grieve on Unsplash

Implications for European Higher Education and Future Outlook

Erosion risks innovation, talent attraction, and democracy—universities must adapt via self-regulation and EU support. Positive signs: Poland's rebound, protective frameworks like Bologna Process. Looking ahead, 2026 STOA panels on U.S. links signal proactive diplomacy.

For academics eyeing opportunities across Europe, platforms like AcademicJobs.com track stable environments. Explore career advice to thrive amid trends, or check professor ratings for insights. Job seekers, visit higher ed jobs, university jobs, and post a job to connect.