About Humility

In recent times, science has met with severe criticisms from some quarters.  In particular, there is a great deal of controversy over technology, often regarded as the application of science.  Its achievements have contributed much to the current prosperity of human society and are recognised on the one hand, yet a variety of harmful influences and its excessive application to human society have attracted the greatest attention on the other.  In general, science is considered occasionally to have lost people’s confidence and perhaps even lost their support. This may be why some people say, “The science era is now over and done with" and “Science and technology should know their limitations”.

When thinking back to the past, we find that the human race has had different experiences in different eras.  In one era, a country may be established under the sole rule of a strong sovereign whose duty was to protect his people from harm.  In another, force of arms solved all problems.  In a third, religions wielded supreme authority, and so on.  People tend to equate each era with its particular events. When one reaches a close, they explain it as if one event had passed on and another born in its place.  This, however, is not necessarily correct.  In the human community, composed of complex beings of different sorts, a given particularity is needed only at a particular moment.  It gets into the spotlight.  It develops.  Even if the period of military expansion is over and done with, armed force continues widely to exist and is often put to practical use. Even if the days of overseas exploration are over, the spirit of adventure still occupies people’s minds.

The term and concept  ‘science’ appeared, I believe, some 500 years ago and the word ‘scientist’ almost two centuries ago.  As the application of science, technology has developed thanks to efforts of scientists, though the word itself has assumed its current usage only a century back.  Amongst these events, the so-called ‘era of science’ emerged.  In the present century especially, all that concerned science and technology were regarded as good, almost omnipotent. Yet, scientists have over-valued science.  They have left others aside. And now it should be admitted that scientists are re-considering such attitudes whilst others are increasingly criticising them. 

Even if we are told that the era of the supremacy of science is almost done, we should not panic.  There is nothing sorrowful in this situation.  It is better that scientists not seek to justify this situation, or that they persistently support science and technology.  It is not for the excesses alone of science and technology that scientists are reproved.  What they are being asked by universities and colleges is for a certain stability and calm.  They should not be afraid of, nor distressed by, this situation.  Simply, they should with calmness of mind set themselves to taking this situation into account.  As in the passing of History, one era moves on towards another.  Here too at this moment, the spotlight, which has focused on one of the facets of human variety, may simply be moving on towards another. 

Even if the era of religion is over, religion is still needed by the community and by individuals.  It continues to be with us.  Likewise, it is certain that human society will need science.  Science will continue to exist after the era of science has gone by.  In all things, those in universities and colleges, both students and staff, should know full well that in this world, omnipotence does not endure.
 

* Wataru Mori, Former President of the University of Tokyo, President of IAU.

• Tbilisi State Medical University, Georgia
• University of Akureyri, Iceland
• Islamic Azad University, Iran
• Zarka Private University, Jordan
• Law Academic of Lithuania, Lithuania
• Monterrey University of Technology, Mexico
• Universidad del Altiplano, Peru
• The Adygei State University, Russia
• Far Eastern State Technical Fisheries University, Dalrybvtuz, Russia
• Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland

The 11th IAU General Conference and 50th Anniversary celebration will be organized in Durban, South Africa, in cooperation and with the support of the University of Natal and the South African University Vice-Chancellors’ Association. Invitations have been mailed to universities and university organizations.

IAU, the UNESCO-based worldwide organization of universities, brings together institutions and organizations from some 150 countries for reflection and action on common concerns.  At the beginning of the new Millennium, the Association will celebrate the Fiftieth Anniversary of its foundation. The theme of the Jubilee General Conference will be Universities – Gateway to the Future.  It will examine the concept of the University as it has evolved over the past half-century and try to identify those developments which, in all likelihood, will contribute to shaping the goals and priorities of universities for the next century. The Conference will further draw conclusions on the best ways in which the Association may serve universities and their leadership in meeting their important responsibilities in the future.

Key issues will be explored around three main questions:
 

What values?
The half-century since the foundation of IAU stands as the most momentous in the long history of the University. It was marked by a triple explosion – of institutions, of students and of knowledge – which had deep and abiding consequences for the place of the university in society. Yet, beyond such transformations, IAU’s Founding Charter recalls the universities’ perennial responsibilities, both as guardians of the intellectual life and for promoting, through teaching and research, the principles of freedom and justice, of human dignity and solidarity. This will be the background for the discussion of the first topic:

Changing Priorities – Constant Values
 

What knowledge?
The transmission of knowledge has always been the generic task of the university and the purposeful search after new knowledge has long been its primary task. Today, these historic monopolies have largely disappeared. As responsibility for these functions is taken over by a variety of other ‘providers’, a number of fundamental questions arise for the future role of universities in the international ‘knowledge enterprise’. General access to knowledge and learning and the conditions of such access in an international setting are, once again, key issues. The valuation of knowledge is increasingly viewed from an economic perspective. Such valuation is crucial, however, in determining society’s dominant values and ethics. It also defines what is socially relevant and useful knowledge. Hence the second topic:

Universities and the ‘Knowledge Society’
 

What leadership ?
One of the more sustained developments within higher education over the past half-century involves the increasingly complex ties with the external world. In terms both operational and symbolic the view of higher education as being ‘market-driven’ has gathered momentum. Thus, higher education has to respond to a multiplicity of intricate, and often conflicting, interests and demands from society. Not all of them lend themselves to being regulated by a ‘market’. Strengthening the social contract between the university and its different stakeholders becomes a prime concern for leadership and governance. When teaching, learning and the generation of knowledge are more than ever the basic determinants of social and economic development, the need to reassert the university’s place as a key actor and partner in the accelerating pace of change stands paramount. The third topic will thus address:

University Governance and the ‘Stakeholder Society’

Contacts:
IAU, 1, rue Miollis, F-75732 Paris, France. 
Tel: + (33) 1 45 68 25 45; 
Fax: + (33) 1 47 34 76 05 ; 
iau@unesco.org;
www.unesco.org/iau

Interaction Conferencing, University of Natal, 232 King George V Avenue, Durban 4041, South Africa. 
Tel: + (27) 31 260 1607 / 1584; 
Fax + (27) 31 260 1606 ; 
munienn@pro.und.ac.za; 
www.nu.ac.za

South African University Vice-Chancellors’Association (SAUVCA); Sunnyside 0132 South Africa, 
Postbus 27392; 
Tel: (27) 12 42 93 015 ; 
Fax: (27) 12 42 94 516

For contacts with African Universities please consult the recent IAU Guide to Higher Education in Africa, co-published by IAU and the Association of African Universities – AAU (www.unesco.org/iau/ghea.html) 

The UN General Assembly has proclaimed the year 2000 the “International Year for the Culture of Peace” under the co-ordination of UNESCO. 

A group of Nobel Prize Peace Laureates drafted MANIFESTO 2000 on the occasion of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. All signatures for the Manifesto will be presented to the UN General Assembly in September 2000. 

UNESCO recognises the essential contribution that universities can make, through responsible research and teaching, to the development of such a “Culture of Peace”. This was discussed during a recent meeting between the Director-General of UNESCO and a number of higher education organizations who committed themselves to sensitise their constituencies, leaders and administrators, teachers, researchers and students to adhere to the Manifesto and to implement within their personal and professional sphere of action the six points it postulates:

1. Respect all life: Respect the life and dignity of every person without discrimination or prejudice. 

2. Reject violence: Practise active non-violence, rejecting violence in all its forms: physical, sexual, psychological, economical and social, in particular towards the most deprived and vulnerable such as children and adolescents. 

3. Share with others: Share my time and material resources in a spirit of generosity to put an end to exclusion, injustice and political and economic oppression. 

4. Listen to understand: Defend freedom of expression and cultural diversity giving preference always to dialogue and listening rather than fanaticism, defamation and the rejection of others. 

5. Preserve the Planet: Promote consumer behaviour that is responsible and development practices that respect all forms of life and preserve the balance of nature on the planet.

6. Rediscover solidarity: Contribute to the development of my community, with the full participation of women and respect for democratic principles, in order to create together new forms of solidarity.

For further information on the International year for the Culture of Peace, and to sign the Manifesto, see: www.unesco.org/cpp or contact UNESCO cofpeace@unesco.org) 

The UNESCO World Conference on Science, which took place in Budapest from 26 June to 1 July1999 (cf. IAU Newsletter, vol.5, no.2), closed with the agreement of delegates from almost 150 countries and over 60 major Non-governmental Organizations on a number of principles and guidelines for implementing a new Social Contract between science and society. IAU was represented at the Conference by President Wataru Mori, Vice-President Flavio Fava de Moraes and Secretary-General Franz Eberhard; the second Vice-President, Hans van Ginkel, was also present in his capacity as Rector of the United Nations University.

The conclusions of the six-day meeting were expressed in two documents, the Declaration on Science and the Use of Scientific Knowledge and a Science Agenda: Framework for Action, both adopted by consensus. The first is a general statement of principle about the importance of science, the need for its continued support from society, and scientists agreeing to accept and respect the responsibilities which this support entails. The second document is intended to provide guidelines through which these principles can be implemented by national governments, international organizations, professional scientific bodies and all those concerned with promoting a responsible relationship between science and society.

The Declaration urges the nations and the scientists of the world to acknowledge the urgency of using knowledge from all fields of science in a responsible manner to address human needs and aspirations without misusing this knowledge. In this connection, adequate participatory mechanisms should be instituted to facilitate democratic debate on scientific policy issues.

Major emphasis is put on the need to ensure the full participation of women in the planning, orientation, conduct and assessment of research activities.  It is proposed that campaigns be launched at national regional and global levels to raise awareness of the contributions of women to science and technology, and that an international network of women scientists be set up.

The documents underline the vital importance for countries to have a critical mass of national research and stress the need to help, in particular, small states and the least developed countries in achieving this goal through regional and international cooperation. They stress that the presence of scientific structures, such as universities, is an essential element for the training of personnel in their own country with a view to a subsequent career in that country.

Governments are urged to provide increased support to regional and international programmes of higher education and to networking of graduate and postgraduate institutions, with special emphasis on North-South and South-South cooperation. Innovative and cost-effective mechanisms for funding should be examined for implementation by relevant institutions at the regional and international levels. Hope is expressed that a recent initiative by the major G8 creditor countries to embark on the process of reducing the debt of certain developing countries will be conducive to a joint effort by the developing and developed countries towards establishing appropriate mechanisms for the funding of science.

Furthermore, initiatives to facilitate access to scientific information sources by scientists and institutions in the developing countries should be especially encouraged and supported, and the establishment of an international programme on Internet-enabled science and vocational education and teaching, together with the conventional system, should be considered to redress the limitations of educational infrastructure and to bring high-quality science education to remote locations.

Also, with regard to the 'brain-drain', and with a view to sustaining high-quality education and research in developing countries, UNESCO is called upon to catalyse more symmetric and closer interaction of science and technology personnel across the world, and the establishment of world-class education and research infrastructure in the developing countries.

With regard to intellectual property rights, while acknowledging the need to consider the scope, extent and application of such rights in relation to the equitable production, distribution and use of knowledge, the final documents do not include any direct reference to concerns expressed about, for example, patents issues on genetic material, expressing the view that all countries should protect intellectual property rights and recognise that access to data and information is essential for scientific progress. Measures should be taken to enhance those relationships between the protection of intellectual property rights and the dissemination of scientific knowledge that are mutually supportive. Also, in developing an appropriate international legal framework, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), in cooperation with relevant international organizations, should constantly address the question of knowledge monopolies.

A sustained effort by a number of developing countries to increase the emphasis given to traditional knowledge systems resulted in agreement that such knowledge should be brought closer to modern scientific knowledge in interdisciplinary projects in areas such as the conservation of biological diversity, the management of natural resources, the understanding of natural hazards and the mitigation of their impact.  On the relationship between modern science and other systems of knowledge the delegates called on governments to formulate national policies that allow a wider use of the applications of traditional forms of learning and knowledge, while at the same time ensuring that its commercialisation is properly rewarded.

A major emphasis was placed on the importance of science education which should be given the highest priority by governments, with particular attention to the elimination of the effects of gender bias and bias against disadvantaged groups, raising public awareness of science and fostering its popularisation.

At the same time, it is stressed that ethics and responsibility of science should be an integral part of the education and training of all scientists, on the grounds that it is important to instil in students a positive attitude towards reflection, alertness and awareness of the ethical dilemmas they may encounter in their professional life. Research institutions, it is suggested, should foster the study of ethical aspects of scientific work. Scientific institutions are urged to respect the freedom of scientists to express themselves on ethical issues and to denounce misuse or abuse of scientific or technological advances. Furthermore, non-governmental organizations and scientific associations and institutions should define a code of ethics for their members and should promote the establishment of ethics committees in their field of competence. 

For further information on the World Science Conference and its follow-up please consult UNESCO’s Website http://www.unesco.org/science/wcs.  A detailed coverage of the Conference was also provided by INature”

Present at the WCS, the IAU Secretary-General delivered the following statement in Plenary Session on 30 June 1999. 

Universities, through research and teaching, provide an essential part of the institutional and human resource base from which science draws its strength. And one should add that, as for universities, the responsibility for the development of science has always been understood and assumed in a broad sense, encompassing the natural sciences, the social sciences and the humanities. 

If a new Social Contract is to be shaped through national and international science policies, it will therefore have to take into account the key role incumbent upon the higher education system. Within this Social Contract, higher education needs to be maintained as a public good, with a decisive responsibility of the state to assure the accomplishment of its long-term missions against the risk of perverting its primary functions through short-sighted market considerations. 

On the other hand, the universities themselves need to clarify and redefine how, within their institutional framework, they can give expression to the social responsibility of their leadership, their staff and their students - to that new commitment this Conference calls for. They need to apply their critical capacity, not only within their research and teaching activity as such, but also and above all with regard to the implications and consequences for society and humankind, of their involvement - or lack of involvement - in finding viable answers to the major questions humanity is facing. 

While underlining the obvious overall relevance of the proposed Declaration and Framework of Action in particular for higher education, we should like to single out here just two proposals which would warrant a broad mobilisation of universities: 

First, the International Association of Universities would strongly support a broad joint initiative between UNESCO and several NGOs - including scientific unions, university organizations, teachers and, certainly, students - on the development of science education. A science education with a strong trans-disciplinary bias and putting particular emphasis on the necessary philosophical and epistemological training to allow every individual scientist to appreciate properly the human, social and ethical implications of his or her work and the specific responsibility linked to it. 

Furthermore, IAU would equally support the proposal of setting in place a process of elaborating and implementing, under the patronage of UNESCO, of an "Academic Pledge" (similar to the Hippocratic Oath for medical doctors). We would suggest that such an effort be linked to the ongoing UNESCO initiative related to the establishment of an international Charter on Academic Freedom. Indeed, the two issues of freedom and of responsibility appear intrinsically linked. 

The International Association of University Presidents (IAUP) held its XIIth Triennial Conference in Brussels, from 11 to 14 July 1999. In a very suitable and well-prepared setting, some 400 participants met around the overall theme Touchstones for a Modern University Culture. In General and Parallel Sessions, as well as during a number of Thematic Visits to Belgian Universities the following topics were discussed: Scientific Competence and Habitus; Social Consensus and Cohesion; Linkages with Industry and Business; Internationalisation, Globalisation and Cultural Diversity; University Linkages with the Performing Arts; and Strategic Management and Professionalisation. 

The Conference was also the occasion for the new leadership, elected three years ago at the San Francisco Congress, to take over its functions for the Triennium. The new President is Sven Caspersen from Aalborg University, Denmark, assisted by the Secretary-General, Jeff van der Perre from the Flemish Interuniversity Council, Belgium, and the Treasurer, Michael Daxner from the University of Oldenburg, Germany. The officers-elect for the period 2002 - 2005 are Ingrid Moses from the University of New England, Australia, as President; James McWha from Massey University, New Zealand, as Secretary-General; and David Robinson from Monash University, Australia, as Treasurer. The next Triennial Conference is to meet in Sydney, in 2002, to discuss the Theme Academic Values, National Dreams and Global Realities.

Following the Conference, a meeting of the IAUP Executive Committee took place in Aalborg.  Under a recent agreement between IAU and IAUP, the IAU Secretary-General, who had also attended the Brussels Conference, was invited to participate for the first time in the IAUP Executive Meeting. In return, IAUP will be invited to be represented in the Meetings of the IAU Administrative Board. This corresponds to the wish of the two organizations (which have a partly overlapping membership) to work more closely together. The fruitful discussion that took place in Aalborg will be pursued at the IAU Board Meeting in Quito, in November, this year. It is hoped that in joining forces we will be in a position to serve and defend better the interests of universities and higher education worldwide.

Major steps have been taken to develop a ‘Higher Education Space’ for students and staff to move between Europe’s universities.  Meeting on June 19th in Bologna (Italy), home to Europe’s most ancient university, the Ministers of Education from 28 European States including the European Community, signed a declaration in favour of further and closer cooperation between universities of the region. 

The meeting, the second of its type, follows last year’s initiative when the Ministers from Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom met at the Sorbonne (France).  Then, they stressed the importance of the university in developing European cultural dimensions. 

Now, the Ministers have committed themselves to further co-ordination in higher education policy. They set both the broad principles to be developed and also a dateline for them to be reached within the coming ten years.  They called for greater compatibility and comparability of higher education systems within Europe. Of particular concern was the need for the future European higher education system to acquire a worldwide attraction.

The Bologna Declaration set out six objectives for the development of higher education in Europe over the next few years.  These were:

The adoption of a system of clearly stated and comparable degrees as a means to improve employability for citizens and at the same time, Europe’s international competitiveness.
The drive towards setting up two main cycles of study, undergraduate and graduate.  Access to graduate study will, in future, require a minimum three years successfully completed at first cycle.
The establishment of a credit system to forward widespread student mobility across frontiers and between universities. 
The removal of obstacles which still stand in the way of free movement, especially those hindering student access to study, training.  Research, teaching and administrative staff should also have those periods they spend professionally in Europe recognised for career purposes.
The promotion of European co-operation in quality assurance with the idea to develop comparable criteria and methodologies.
Finally, the strengthening of the ‘European dimension’ particularly in the area of curriculum development and in integrated programmes of study, training and research. 

Clearly, the Bologna declaration which marks the tenth anniversary of the Charter of the European Universities also signed at Bologna, comes as a new stage in the move towards defining a ‘European higher education system’.  Old taboos are rapidly vanishing.  Nowhere is there to be found any reference to that bugbear of certain governments, namely, ‘harmonisation’, an issue of long and enduring conflict in the recent past between Brussels and certain Member States.  The lines between harmonisation and real co-ordination seem to be softening.

Just as important, however, is the presence as signatories of countries formally outside the European Union – amongst which Iceland, Latvia, the Czech Republic, Romania and Poland.  European higher education, if the intentions of Ministers are fulfilled, will no longer be associated with the more prosperous West alone.

The full document of the Joint Declaration is available on Internet at: http://www.europedu.org/gb/index.html