
Ce mardi, 10 mars, le Conseil universitaire de l’Université du Luxembourg va élire un nouveau membre du Conseil de gouvernance suite à la démission de Ludger Wirtz. Conformément au règlement d’ordre intérieur de l’Université (paragraphe 80), seuls des membres du Conseil universitaire peuvent présenter des candidats au vote. Je remercie cordialement Diane Pierret d’avoir bien voulu proposer ma candidature. Ci-dessous mes motivations pour cette candidature.
Our university is at a pivotal moment in its history. After more than two decades of rapid development, it has become a central academic institution in Luxembourg and a visible actor in the European higher-education landscape. At the same time, recent debates have shown that growth and success cannot be the only horizon for a university. This is also a moment to reflect on how the institution is governed, how decisions are made, and how the academic community can play a stronger role in shaping its future.
My candidacy is grounded in a long-standing commitment to the University of Luxembourg and to collegial forms of academic life. I first joined the university as a postdoctoral researcher and have served as professor since 2011. Over these years, I have followed its development closely, with both attention and a critical sense of responsibility. At key moments, I have taken public positions on important institutional issues. Within the university, I also helped build up the newly founded interdisciplinary centre C²DH, where I served on the management team for five years. As a teacher at the University of Luxembourg since 2008, working at Bachelor’s, Master’s and doctoral level, and as a researcher who recently obtained an ERC Advanced Grant, I have consistently sought to bring together the university’s two core missions: transmitting knowledge and creating new knowledge. Beyond the university, I have also assumed public responsibilities, for example as a member of the Conseil des Archives. These experiences have strengthened my conviction that a university cannot be governed exclusively from the top, but requires structures of discussion, contradiction and shared decision-making.
My candidacy is articulated around three priorities.
First, I believe that the governance of the university needs to be reformed. More power should be given to those who work and teach within the institution. This requires, on the one hand, a different practice within the framework of the existing law and, on the other hand, a readiness to work towards changing that law where necessary. In research, we trust peer-based procedures because knowledge advances through critique, evaluation, and debate among equals. I believe this principle should inspire our governance practices as well. A university governed more collegially would also be a stronger and more legitimate university.
Second, I want to advocate for greater transparency. Transparency is not simply a matter of publishing more information. It also requires pedagogy: making institutional processes intelligible, clarifying what is at stake in decisions, and enabling staff and students to understand how and why choices are made. Too often, university governance appears opaque, distant, or overly technical. A more transparent institution is one in which members of the community can participate with knowledge rather than suspicion, and with confidence rather than resignation.
Third, I want to stand for a conception of the university that goes beyond the logic of a mere service provider in a knowledge economy. A university is not just one actor among others competing to deliver skills, innovation, or employability. It is a fundamental institution of democratic society. Its role is to produce, test, transmit, and discuss knowledge in ways that allow societies to make informed choices based on evidence, argument, and critical reflection. At a time when public debate is increasingly shaped by simplification, polarization, and short-term logics, the university must defend its broader mission with clarity and courage.


