At the same time, given the current geopolitical situation, there is a need for effective border control and rules that prevent permits to study or work in Sweden from being misused for criminal purposes and for illegal immigration into the country and Europe.

Over time, various regulations have been tightened to curb abuse, not least with regard to the rules for study permits. At times, there has been considerable frustration at universities about long processing times, and students have sometimes been unable to obtain residence permits in time for the start of the semester, despite having been admitted.

It is important to ensure that the right students, who have what is known as an intention to study, are properly admitted and can also go through the process of obtaining a residence permit. In recent years, the universities, through the SUHF, and the Swedish Migration Agency have worked intensively to jointly define problems and shortcomings and to address some obvious weaknesses in the system.

Recently, the universities and the Migration Agency have reached an agreement whereby the educational centres undertake to report interruptions in studies to the Migration Agency in a systematic and quality-assured manner. On this basis, the Migration Agency can now issue two-year residence permits to students instead of the previous one-year permits.This will reduce the number of cases and processing times, while giving students greater security during their studies.

This is very positive. At the same time, a number of other measures are being considered to improve opportunities for foreign students and workers. These include measures relating to the higher education sector and more general investigations into the immigration of skilled workers.

Another important area for foreign students is to have a reasonable chance of establishing themselves in the Swedish labour market after their studies. This requires both that companies and organisations recruit talent from this group of graduates and that regulations do not force graduates to leave too quickly.

If Sweden is to manage the supply of skills in the long term, we must be able to attract foreign students and employees to Sweden and not lose talent abroad. This is what internationalisation is all about!This is very positive. At the same time, investigations are under way into several other measures to improve opportunities for foreign students and employees. These include measures affecting the university sector and more generally oriented investigations into skilled labour immigration.

Another important area for foreign students is to have a reasonable opportunity to establish themselves in the Swedish labour market after their studies. This requires both that companies and organisations recruit talent from this group of graduates and that the regulations do not force graduates to leave too quickly.

If Sweden is to manage the supply of skills in the long term, we must be able to attract foreign students and employees to Sweden and not lose talent abroad. This is internationalisation for real!

Trust-based governance is often seen as the antithesis of New Public Management (NPM) as a fundamentally different governance philosophy. I think this is both right and wrong. NPM is about governing by setting goals and measuring results and less by providing detailed definitions of how resources should be used. The warnings perhaps have most to do with the fact that excessive measurement of results can lead to the building up of both a control machinery and detailed management through excessively precise instructions and guidelines.

KTH as a university wants to continue to manage with goals and continue to be able to control results. That is almost self-evident. But in a trust-based system, employees are given a greater degree of independence when it comes to interpreting how work is best organised in individual cases or areas. However, this requires an ability to take a holistic view and a knowledge of what best contributes to the organisation as a whole.

Sometimes it is not appropriate to do things in many different ways. Procedures for security work, for invoicing, for recruitment or for procurement should probably be standardized to a large extent. But at the same time, it is necessary to trust that employees can actually do this in their daily work without overloading the organisation with detailed instructions.

At the same time, the methods of research, the pedagogy in the classroom or online, the way of interacting with business partners, or the skills needs of different research teams can take many different forms.

In other words, work can be carried out in different ways without needing to be managed at a more detailed level as long as we rely on staff to take overall responsibility for the whole and for delivering good results.

The question is whether, for example, it is enough to say that travel should be carried out in a way that minimizes costs and the climate footprint, or whether detailed descriptions are needed of exactly over what distances flights can be allowed and when people can use their own cars instead of public transport?

Is it possible to require research supervisors to have termly conversations with all doctoral students about the progress of the projects relative to learning objectives, etc. without it being documented with more than a note that such a conversation took place. Or do we need to ensure the content of such conversations through checklists of all topics that must be reviewed?

I realize that one can argue for both detailed and more trust-based governance. But, the important thing is that in reviewing our own bureaucracy, we constantly ask whether the level of detail in governance is proportionate to what we are achieving.

Fewer guidelines, less bureaucracy and more trust paired with greater accountability and sense of ownership of the whole. If nothing else, that should be our compass as we build the university for the future.

Universities have their own pace, which is very much linked to the semesters and student attendance on campus. When the term ends, it doesn’t take long before it’s time to enjoy the reception activities and the life they bring to our beautiful campuses in August.

However, there are a total of eleven conferences on campus during the summer period, mainly now in June. These are important meetings where our researchers host international gatherings in their respective subject areas and where we also have an opportunity to welcome guests to our beautiful campus.

The spring has been partly characterised by the demonstrations against the war in Gaza. Like many other universities, KTH has also had its fair share of tent camps, loud activism, vandalism of both the external and internal environment and many people on the move on campus. I am aware that many people have felt uncomfortable with both the vandalism and the protests, while at the same time expressing sympathy for the right to express one’s views.

While both reactions are in some sense justified, I do recognise that the presence of protesters and the expressions of protest have led to a reduction in safety on campus lately.

Recently, the demonstration in the courtyard has ended and it is my hope that this expression of opinion will now take on other forms that involve more conversation and dialogue between different parties around society.

KTH needs to focus on education and research. We need to rally around the upcoming start of the semester and show care and trust in each other’s positions rather than distrust and violence.

In a few days, it will be 20 June and the summer solstice. The longest day of the year when the Earth’s axis is tilted most towards the sun. It sometimes seems strange that by the time most of us go on vacation, the days have already started to get shorter. That’s when you have to remind yourself that there are still many weeks of summer left and that the sun has only just begun to warm up the bathing water in our seas and lakes.

The link is not only between engineering education and Islamist extremism, but also with neo-Nazis, white power groups and neo-Stalinists. Engineers lack mental openness, are drawn to order and clarity, and are disgusted by the deviant.

Truly astonishing data. Like recently when a study at the University of Gothenburg showed that out of 300 young men sentenced to prison, mainly for violent offences, a majority had some form of psychiatric or neuropsychiatric diagnosis, 40 per cent had ADHD. A few years ago, Uppdrag granskning showed that of all those convicted of rape in the last five years, 58 per cent were foreign-born. That review included 843 perpetrators.

It’s stumblingly close that just as Gina Gustavsson believes that a majority of all engineers are potential terrorists, most people with ADHD or autism must reasonably be particularly prone to violence and foreign-born men can be assumed to be particularly predisposed to rape. If you reduce immigration, lock up people with ADHD at an early age and stop training engineers, you will have fewer violent crimes and fewer terrorists!

It’s a bit of a head scratcher. On the editorial and debate pages, you can of course think what you like, but surely it would be wise to have some logic in the arguments put forward. We can all agree that more of a social perspective and traditional education may be required in engineering programmes, as in all other education, but to conclude that engineering education as such breeds terrorism is nothing but qualified nonsense.

One wishes that those who defend the humanities and social sciences had better friends than DN’s editorial page!

In practice, the model means that the funds allocated by the government and the parliament for universities to conduct education and research are returned to the state through the surplus profits generated by the rental model.

Right now, we are stuck in an economic stranglehold that effectively sucks the energy out of the universities’ activities, as I wrote about in a post https://www.kth.se/blogs/president/2024/05/enough-is-enough/ a few weeks ago. But, for the reform-minded and progressive politician looking for a basis to shape a new solution for premises provision, there are several ways to go.

One relatively simple measure that should be implemented immediately is to change the ownership directive for Akademiska Hus so that a cost-based rental model replaces the current market-based model. A variant of this change is to retain market-based rents but to return the funds received from state-owned Akademiska Hus back to the higher education policy area within the framework of the government budget.

A variant of this change is to retain market-based rents but to return the funds received from the state-owned Akademiska Hus back to the higher education policy area within the framework of the state budget. One of these two measures needs to be implemented immediately, no later than the 2025 budget, to ensure that the university sector is not forced into the abyss of eroded funding and increased rents. At the same time, the rent increases of recent years should be compensated through targeted funding for universities and colleges.

In the longer term, the entire current model should be scrapped. As long as authorities cannot own their own properties, the properties currently owned by Akademiska Hus should be transferred to foundations linked to the respective higher education institutions, which should also have control over the foundation’s operations. In this way, rents can be set either on a cost basis or in line with the market, with surplus profits being returned via the foundation controlled by the university.

I realise that those who are against change can find many arguments against change, but I am equally convinced that those who want to see change can find their way through the regulations so that we can have a reasonable and business-like model for managing the accommodation needs of universities. It is time to address this. It is time for responsible politicians to recognise what is currently the greatest threat to the universities’ activities and, by extension, to the supply of skills for Swedish society and for the country’s long-term competitiveness.