UvA vicechair Jan Lintsen: “We can prevent layoffs if we make the right choices now”
Many universities are now laying off staff due to the budget cuts, but the UvA seems to be able to avoid this by cutting back in other areas, according to UvA Vice Chair Jan Lintsen. “We are generously, or perhaps even too generously, using our square meters. To save on rent, faculties and departments can ‘return’ rooms they think they don’t need to the UvA. That can generate a lot of money by doing so.”
The university world is up in arms about the announced budget cuts, but when we look at the UvA budget for this year, it is not as bad as it seems: the UvA is only forecasting a negative result of 1.3 million on a total budget of just over a billion.
“In 2025, we will indeed still be in the black and will not yet have to take drastic measures, even though the cost increases, inflation and the decline in the number of (international) students will continue. But we had a good starting position. We have been budgeting at zero for years and then it turns out that we actually end up in the black every year. That is due to our model: we are a university that passes on all costs, which means that the faculties and services operate in a cost-conscious manner and apply the brakes themselves if too much is spent.”
Many faculties are still in the red; they are therefore allowed to use their reserves, which makes it seem as if it is not so bad after all. Am I correct in my assumption?
“The faculties and services are of course also feeling the effects of inflation and rising wage costs. They are indeed allowed to use reserves in the short term, but this cannot go on forever. We have agreed that after 2027 the budgets must return to zero, without using reserves. This means that faculties and services will have to work to restore their departments to financial health.”
The previous minister, former UvA professor Robbert Dijkgraaf, made 5 billion euros available in 2022 (in Dutch) to make ‘overdue investments’ over a period of ten years. That now seems to be off the table again. Wasn’t the current austerity operation predictable?
“That investment was in the coalition agreement at the time and the need for it was also confirmed by a report from PwC, which stated that Dutch science was structurally underfunded. We as universities were also convinced of this and the money came, at least a start was made. I also partly see the sudden annual cuts of more than a billion as a bit of a grudge against higher education: certain parties in The Hague harbour the idea that universities have a culture they call ‘woke’ and that they don’t like. I think everyone should make some sacrifices, but these disproportionate cutbacks seem to have been made with a certain pleasure by the current cabinet, and I don’t think that’s right.”
The UvA’s government funding will be cut by 29 million euros this year. It seems like a lot, but in the context of the entire UvA budget, it’s peanuts, right?
“You may think so, but this was money that could have been used to reduce the workload and invest in young researchers. I would have liked to do that, but now there is no room for that.”
Many universities are announcing layoffs. Should we fear the same at the UvA?
“I think we can avoid layoffs if we make the right choices in the near future.”
What are good choices? What do you advise faculties that have to tighten their belts?
“There are gains to be made in three areas. First: housing. We have more than enough space, or perhaps even too much. People are not there every day, sometimes square metres are little used or rooms can be shared. To save on rent, faculties and services can ‘return’ offices and rooms they think they don’t need to the UvA. That can save a lot of money.”
“In addition, we can make less use of hiring external agencies and consultants. Hiring is usually expensive. We should make smarter use of each other’s knowledge instead of immediately hiring expensive outsiders. Thirdly, I think that faculties can harmonise their (logistical) work processes. Everyone has their own way of doing things, but there is room for improvement and therefore cost reduction. Standardisation is more efficient.”
Perhaps also selling off old and expensive buildings?
“We are going to review the entire accommodation portfolio in the coming period. That subject will also come up. The P.C. Hoofthuis and the old University Library on Singel may be sold in the long term. Don’t forget that the new University Library on the Binnengasthuisterrein will open in August, so we will need less space elsewhere.”
From 2026 onwards, further cuts in government funding are imminent, partly because the number of international students is continuing to decline. Will the UvA accept this?
“We accept that the UvA will have fewer international students in the future. What’s more, even if it costs us money, I think it’s a good thing, because there have also become too many, as former rector Karen Maex already said in 2018. Some of them are quite wealthy and therefore put a lot of pressure on the housing market in Amsterdam. It is right that we take action and we have already shown in recent years that this is possible, for example with a quota on English-language tracks. But we oppose the Balanced Internationalisation Act and the rigorous Test on Foreign Language Education, as these are simply not necessary. We can also arrange that as a sector. I can also live with the fact that the UvA is shrinking a little more in terms of internationals than Maastricht, where they are more dependent on international students than here. But the UvA is and will remain bilingual, which means it will also be English-speaking. And as far as we are concerned, the foreign language education test for existing English-language bachelor’s programmes is off the table, if only because various English-language programmes keep the Dutch-language variant alive.”
Shouldn’t we move to a completely different funding model for universities, one that is no longer based on variable student numbers?
“Many people are thinking about this at various levels. You would have to think about a system of capacity funding. You would then determine in advance how many students you want for a particular programme, and you would not be allowed to take on more. This happens in Scandinavian countries, but I don’t think such top-down control is appropriate in the Dutch context. It means you have to say ‘no’ to people who would like to follow a course of study, simply because a decision has been made from above about how many students there should be. But students’ freedom to choose their course of study is very important and the government cannot predict or control the job market. So I don’t think that’s desirable from either a social or an economic point of view. I think the existing funding system for the Netherlands is the least bad, perhaps with a little less focus on variable student numbers and a little more focus on the fixed component of the funding.”
