The Tulip Fund: A gift we cannot afford

We, a group of nearly 30 postdocs and PhDs of the Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research Utrecht (IMAU) within the department of Physics, collectively oppose UU’s plans to apply for money from the Tulip Fund. We believe this fund is ineffective, discriminatory, and not in the best interest of either the university or its employees.

The Tulip Fund was created earlier this year in response to massive budget cuts and layoffs affecting scientific research in the US, which threaten academic freedom. In principle, we support the fund's stated intent to help scientists from countries where academic freedom is under threat. However, the NWO Tulip Fund call focuses solely on academic excellence, to the point that academic freedom being under threat in the candidate's country is not even part of the selection criteria. 

The Tulip Fund and UU’s internal selection procedure are at odds with the academic principles of transparency and equality. Rather than following an open application process, UU has instructed its faculties to propose names of scientists who could be hired. This risks favouritism, motivating UU scientists to nominate candidates they know well and get along with, who are likely to come only from countries where UU scientists have a network. It goes completely against the university's principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion. 

Financially, the Tulip Fund is no free lunch either. The fund only provides a 5-year grant, so the university is responsible for paying the scientist after that. Given the recent structural reduction in university budgets by 300 million euros – roughly six times the Tulip Fund's 50 million euros – this is not a good deal.

Some institutes have suggested combining funds from the Tulip fund with existing and/or upcoming vacancies to address the financial shortfall. However, this strategy comes at the expense of finding the best candidate, as many excellent researchers will be excluded. It would also deny UU’s own brilliant early-career researchers a fair chance. Every year, new reports are published detailing the negative effects that the lack of security and stability has on the wellbeing of postdocs, including disproportionally high levels of stress and being forced to put off major life decisions such as buying a house or starting a family. This way, using the Tulip Fund would favour short-term financial gain over the wellbeing and future of UU’s own staff.

Following discussions in which these concerns were raised, our institute, IMAU, has decided not to put forward a candidate for the Tulip Fund. We believe that UU should do the same. The Tulip Fund is a bad idea. It does little to nothing to protect academic freedom, while the opaque hiring process favours connections over equal opportunity. The financial impact means the price is paid by the university itself and its excellent young researchers in particular, who are denied a fair chance at an academic career. We therefore urge the university to reject it. The Tulip Fund is a gift we cannot afford.

The views expressed above belong to the authors and do not necessarily represent the views held by DUB's editors. Would you like to publish an op-ed on DUB as well? Please send it to dubredactie@uu.nl.