The rise of modern science and technology has led us to where we are and yet, science can also help us to identify what’s going on and to search for solutions. Tsjalling doesn’t believe this is incompatible with the quest for pure knowledge, that many think is the main task of the university. He points out that a lot of academic research has always been propelled by societal, often economic, needs and values. But indeed, the university is more than the handmaiden of social and economic interests. “Despite the fact that the economy influences on what’s being researched at universities, there's also a more ideal side to the university and that is that the university is a place where you can speak truth to power. It's a bit old-fashioned maybe, but I do feel that there's this mission for a university to do just that and to advise even if the advice is not being sought or is not being paid for or is not being desired even.”

-article will continue below picture-

The sustainable university of the future

Soon, Maastricht University will start dialogue sessions on whether and how to continue the cooperation with partners in the fossil industry. To Tsjalling one of the questions that should be debated is: what would the sustainable university of the future look like? “We have this mission of becoming sustainable. So what does that imply indeed for how we draw students, how we collaborate internationally and what our footprint is?” He continues: “Universities rely on mass education, a lot of international students, a lot of academic travel as well, conferences, etc. So we as academics also thrived thanks to fossil fuel and the growth that fossil fuel has brought to society. Right now we have to ask ourselves: is it worth the footprint? 

Going forward by envisioning an alternate future

Despite the public actions and awareness that’s being raised, people are still looking away. Do actions like those of Extinction Rebellion have the effect that you want them to have? Tsjalling: “Well, simply telling people how bad the situation is, doesn't work. And simply asking them to imagine the coming apocalypse doesn't work either. Mind you, we are not even talking about the future anymore. Right now the consequences are no longer long-term. They are manifesting already, here and now. But even then, we still have difficulty to change our established ways of living. Like people used to look at God to save them, now people have unrealistic expectations of technology.”
For Tsjalling answering the question "What will propel us into action?" is imperative. He continues: “Under what conditions became it suddenly self-evident that slavery was wrong? One of the explanations is that slavery only became wrong at the moment people could imagine an alternative to it. This is probably generalisable: people only spring into action to change the present when they feel that there's a practical alternative.”
Tsjalling concludes that envisioning an alternate future and working on solutions generates the hope we need. “What always strikes me is that if I go to, let's say, a conference in Delft on circular economy, all the students at technical universities are often astutely aware of what's happening. But that is also because they are happily working on solutions to avoid the catastrophe. They can allow themselves to acknowledge global warming, because they can envision a solution. But if you can't envision a solution, there's no bonus on acknowledging the problem. Practical engagement thus presupposes some hope, but it also generates hope.”

By Sustainable UM 2030, Sandy Langenhuizen and Clarence Bluntz