Civic engagement and academic freedom of academics in post-1997 Hong Kong

Abstract

This paper aims to unpack the dynamics and complexities of the relationships between civic engagement and academic freedom of academics in Hong Kong after it ceased to be a British colony and became a special administrative region of China in 1997. Numerous studies have examined the issues of academic freedom and proposed that it can be both universal across cultures and particularistic in specific cultures. Many other works have looked into the third mission of higher education, civic engagement, in addition to teaching and research. They focus mainly on university students’ civic engagement through community service or service learning and on how to extend their civic learning to include global citizenship. Academics’ civic engagement and its relationship to academic freedom, however, is under-researched; this warrants attention. Using documentary analysis as the major methodology, the paper examines the struggles of academics over the issues of civic engagement and academic freedom in post-1997 Hong Kong. Specifically, it reviews six critical incidents which were or were perceived as threats to academic freedom or university autonomy since 1997. Two of the incidents were related to the local (Hong Kong) government, and the other concerned the new local-central (China) relationships after 1997. The analysis reveals five major findings. First, these incidents differed in terms of the types of actors who infringed upon or were suspected to threaten the freedom and autonomy of academics and universities and how the latter handled the incident. Second, they shared a similar pattern of university-government-society relations. Despite different forms and different levels, all (except one) incidents involved the civic engagement of academics as citizens participating in political affairs in civil society, and government’s toleration of their views or research findings which are not in its favour. Third, threat to academic freedom or university autonomy can come from different judgments on the merit of academics’ research and the dissemination in civic engagement of their research findings or view. Fourth, the mass media can play two contrasting roles in university-government-society relationships: a major protector safeguarding the freedom and autonomy of individual academics and universities as institutions, and a dangerous powerful force intimidating and suppressing individual academics’ freedom to express their criticisms and civic engagement in public affairs that the authorities do not like. Fifth, freedom and autonomy of individual academics and university are socio-political constructions which are developed, interpreted, and put into practice by different actors in their social and political contexts. The paper contributes to the fields of academic freedom and civic engagement of academics in two major aspects. First, it adds to academic understanding of the relationships between civic engagement and academic freedom. Second, it provides a useful case, demonstrating how local-central relationships can affect the interpretation and practice of academic freedom and civic engagement in local community.