Navigating Academia in a Foreign Space: An Interview with Professor Vanessa Lim
Vanessa Lim is a professor in the English Department of SNU, part of the school’s growing international faculty. As she shares her journey that has taken her across the globe from the UK to Korea...
[81th Edition] Letter from the Editor
Dear readers,
For the past couple of years, I have been contemplating the space that The SNU Quill occupies within our largely Korean-speaking university—where our English publication fits into the broader community. It’s kind of funny, considering the sheer vastness of our campus; it took us over an hour just to install two magazine stands across the university grounds (which you can find in the Student Center and Doosan Humanities Hall, by the way).
Still, within the sprawling reaches of our campus, the reality remains: space is limited. When an ahjussi manspreads on the subway, we instinctively shrink back; each claim to space carries inherent consequences for others. Similarly, I found that I’ve been increasingly denying myself the right to fully occupy space. I began dressing in clothes that stand out less, afraid to intrude on others’ visual spaces. I step aside, soften my voice, slump my posture.
But within these pages, I reclaim my rights to project my voice and declare my opinions. And this has always been the ethos of our magazine—to give a platform to those who might otherwise go unheard. With this realization, it became clear to me what The SNU Quill offers to our writers and readers alike. It is a space where we can collectively assert our presence.
The 81st edition’s theme is grounded on “Space.” A new building stands where another once stood, some flourish while others are pushed further into the margins. The inevitable question arises: who gets to take up space, and who decides how it’s allocated? This question is now more pressing than ever. We invite you, dear readers, to join us as we explore the concept of space: how we define it, navigate it, and occupy it.
The cover, captured by our photographer Hye-won, serves as a striking frontispiece capturing this edition’s theme—geometric, energetic, and hopeful. We open SNU Society with an interview featuring Professor Vanessa Lim from the English department, who shares her journey navigating academia in Korea as a foreigner. In our Features section, we explore the challenges faced by youths, Kyopo, and prisoners in Korea, shedding light on the unique struggles they face. Our Arts and Culture section dives into the vibrant world of K-pop, public art, and the secrets behind the chocolate we consume. This edition also features an article by Kim Ha-jin, the first-prize winner of our magazine's very first English Column Writing Competition. His compelling account offers a firsthand look at his experience during Seoul's Pride Parade.
As we delve into our musings over space and identity, it is my hope that you find a sense of belonging within these pages. Afterall, the world calls to you—harsh and exciting—announcing your place in the family of things.
Sincerely,
Min Yun-geun
Bringing Climate Change to the International Court of Justice: A Milestone for Climate Justice
In March 2023, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly passed a resolution to request the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to outline each country’s obligations in regard to combatting climate change. Advocated for since 2021 by the Pacific island state Vanuatu, the initial campaign for the resolution was led by Pacific Island Students Fight Climate Change (PISFCC) and gained greater traction from there. The students aimed to raise awareness of the plights faced by the Pacific Island states and to emphasize the necessity of each country fulfilling its climate obligations.
This marks the beginning of a historical moment, as it is the first time that the ICJ is going to advise countries on their legal obligations concerning climate change. Though the advisory opinion given is not legally binding, it does indeed have legal significance on an international scale. The ICJ is to clarify the climate obligations and rights of each state in black-and-white terms, based on the binding international laws of today, which provides legal backing to the climate obligations of each state. The advisory opinion is to be rendered in accordance with the following question:
(a) What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for States and for present and future generations;
(b) What are the legal consequences under these obligations for States where they, by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment, with respect to:
(i) States, including, in particular, small island developing States, which due to their geographical circumstances and level of development, are injured or specially affected by or are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change?
(ii) Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change?
If we take those majorly industrialized and densely populated countries as one extreme, the other is some of the island states spread across the different oceans. Examples include the island nations in the Pacific such as Palau, Micronesia, and Vanuatu. These Pacific island states are extremely vulnerable to the worst effects of climate change, especially the rising of sea levels, as most of them are low-lying. The lives of island inhabitants are increasingly threatened by the diminishing amount of land available for housing and farming. Climate change is not just something that is worrying for such people but is an ongoing crisis that is challenging their survival and eroding their basic rights to life. Ironically, these islands are also only responsible for 0.03% of greenhouse gas emissions, in contrast to the top 10 emitters that contribute to more than 60% of the emissions globally. In simple terms, these developing countries are the smallest contributors to climate change yet are suffering its worst consequences brought on by the major emitters. This is the definition of climate injustice.
In the past, the Paris Agreement declared a global effort to limit the rise of global surface temperatures to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. However, this global agreement does not come with legal obligations that clarify the consequences a country will face if it neglects the actions required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a national level or even engages in activities that are actively harmful to the environment.
In contrast, bringing the issue of climate change, in such a manner, to the ICJ signifies formal acknowledgment of the existing climate injustice in countries around the world. This opens up the possibility of better defining what a fair share is for each country’s climate obligations and the corresponding mechanisms in place to ensure that every country is fully committed to global climate action. This makes climate action more an achievable necessity than an afterthought. That’s the reason why Prime Minister Ishmael Kalsakau of Vanuatu stated the following in a statement for the UN: “Vanuatu sees [the] historic resolution as the beginning of a new era in multilateral climate cooperation, one that is more fully focused on upholding the rule of international law and an era that places human rights and intergenerational equity at the forefront of climate decision-making.”
The concept of “saving our planet together” should not just be a hollow slogan but a sentiment that is reflected in our actual actions. “The more you pollute, the more you pay” is a basic principle that everyone can understand. The issues caused by the major emitters should at no point become a heavy and unreasonable burden on struggling nations, particularly to the extent that their people’s well-being and basic survival are compromised. Major polluters should pay more instead of expecting minor emitters to share the cost equally. Referring the issue to the ICJ is not the final solution to the global threat of climate change. Nonetheless, the ICJ’s advisory opinion should give a clear definition of each country’s legal obligations and how international law can play its role in supervising each country’s progress under this collaborative climate campaign. The advisory opinion is expected to be delivered in 2025, and the dedication of each country toward the stated obligations will then ultimately determine the success of our fight against climate change.
University Rankings: More than just numbers
The University of Zurich (UZH) announced on March 13 this year that it would no longer provide data for the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Ranking. As the alma mater of the well-known physicist Albert Einstein and with its association with 12 Nobel Prize laureates, UZH’s decision to quit the THE ranking was like a bomb dropped on the realm of academia. According to the news released, UZH withdrew from the THE World University Ranking as “the ranking is not able to reflect the wide range of activities in teaching and research undertaken by universities.” UZH emphasized that the rankings “generally focus on measurable output, which can have unintended consequences.”
The possible consequences a global university ranking can bring about have been a topic of enduring discussion. Many claim that these rankings push universities to pursue measurable outputs that help boost their ranking. This may lead to a concentration of resources being invested into certain fields and disciplines that are able to churn out considerable amounts of research, intensifying the unfairness of resource allocation. Moreover, the quality of teaching and research may be compromised if universities focus too much on publishing. At the same time, universities using their rankings as one of the main means of attracting potential students is becoming an increasingly common practice, as apparent from taking a look at universities’ official websites and social media accounts.
One should always be reminded that university rankings do not necessarily reflect the realities of a student’s experience on campus. Take our many undergraduate students as an example. Most spend a large amount of their time in university attending lectures given by notable professors in high-tech lecture halls, gathering with friends in meeting rooms, and preparing for examinations at huge tables in the library. All of these experiences are impossible to evaluate based on a quantitative measure like university rankings.
Nonetheless, such a quantitative measure can give us a brief insight into the reputation of academic institutions, making the selection process easier for students when they apply to university. One can identify renowned universities—on a regional or local scale—just by looking at university rankings. Imagine that there are no rankings published. How can students narrow down the potential universities that they will apply to out of a huge pool of options? As an international student myself, I was able to easily identify the renowned universities and departments in Korea, that offer the courses I was looking for, by looking at various rankings. At the same time, some other indicators used by university rankings, like the international members ratio, gave me a hint into how accommodating different programs are towards international students.
No matter what your stance is regarding university ranking systems, one cannot deny that looking at rankings is the most reliable way to assess and compare universities, as non-quantitative factors are almost impossible to standardize for comparison. When we look at university rankings, we should always try and find out what the evaluation methods are for deciding them. Moreover, examining the different rankings of a single university might give us insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a university and a better understanding of the evaluation criterion of ranking systems. As an example, Seoul National University is ranked 41st in the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Ranking and 2nd in the THE World University Ranking, while Yonsei University is ranked 76th in both. One can thus look into why the rankings appear so different for these institutions. The extra work of cross-analysis is necessary as it is not enough to rely on a single ranking system to get the insight that we are looking for.
We may never reach a consensus on whether or not university ranking systems should exist in our society. It seems that there is no better and more efficient way of comparing universities than through the currently available rankings. Despite this, we should always think about what we can learn from these rankings. If a ranking can effectively point out the shortcomings of a university, it can be used as a reference for students to find alternative universities to avoid those drawbacks. At the same time, a university may also identify and be motivated to improve upon its shortcomings, as evident through its ranking.
According to the 2024 QS World University Ranking, many Korean universities saw a drop in their ranking. SNU was not an exception and scored only 36.9 out of 100 for the criterion of international research network, 11.5 out of 100 for the criterion of international faculty, and 14.5 out of 100 for the international students ratio criteria. These results are particularly relevant to many international students including myself. This criterion doesn’t necessarily mean that a particular university is not performing well in its teaching or research activities but can give a hint of the perspective of international students on whether or not the university is a good choice for them. A low ratio of international members may mean less accessibility to university facilities and services as well as classes for students who don’t know Korean. If international students want to fully immerse themselves in their academic environment, they must know if they need to pick up the language or attend a different institution.
While I admit that the existence of university rankings can pose several dilemmas, I personally feel that SNU having a favorable rank is of no harm; in fact, it fulfills one of my qualifications for choosing a university. I believe that other members of our university may feel the same way. While some people may solely focus on the rankings of universities when deciding where to apply, others may simply want to know how various universities are performing according to their ranks. Regardless, we should always be reminded that rankings are just a quantitative measure that cannot paint a complete picture of one's academic experience.
