Academic Freedom as a Contested Public Good Ideology, Trust and Public Attitudes in the UK and Japan

Academic freedom is widely regarded as a cornerstone of democratic society, yet its public legitimacy remains contested. This article examines how citizens in two democracies (Japan and the United Kingdom) understand and evaluate academic freedom across different issue domains. Drawing on original survey data (N = 3,352), we explore whether public support for academic freedom is associated with ideological orientation and institutional trust. We propose a theoretical framework distinguishing between autonomy and accountability logics: while some citizens treat academic freedom as a non-negotiable principle, others view it as contingent on social responsibility or moral alignment. Our analysis shows that support for academic freedom is associated with political polarisation: right-leaning respondents consistently favour autonomy, particularly in cases involving controversial research or offensive ideas, whereas left-leaning individuals show greater support for limiting academic freedom in the name of social sensitivity. These patterns are robust across both countries, despite contrasting institutional contexts. We also find that trust in scientists is strongly associated with pro-autonomy attitudes, especially in Japan. By treating academic freedom as a contested public good, this study sheds light on how normative commitments, political ideology, and institutional trust interact to shape public attitudes toward knowledge, expertise, and university governance.