PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] — Brown University will not divest from 10 companies described in a student-led divestment proposal as facilitating “the Israeli occupation of Palestinian Territory.”
The Corporation of Brown University voted on Tuesday, Oct. 8, to support a recommendation from Brown’s Advisory Committee on University Resources Management (ACURM) against divestment. University Chancellor Brian T. Moynihan and President Christina H. Paxson said that with a majority vote to accept ACURM’s recommendation, the Corporation — Brown’s highest governing body — stated its clear position opposing divestment, and accordingly, the University will not divest.
“In particular, Corporation members noted ACURM’s finding that Brown’s exposure to the 10 companies identified in the divestment proposal is de minimis, that Brown has no direct investments in any of the companies targeted for divestment and that any indirect exposure for Brown in these companies is so small that it could not be directly responsible for social harm, as defined in ACURM’s charge,” they wrote in an Oct. 9 letter to the Brown campus. “These findings alone are sufficient reason to support ACURM’s recommendation.”
ACURM’s analysis, which was made public alongside the Corporation’s decision, played a central role in the Corporation’s deliberations, Moynihan and Paxson said. As stated in the campus letter, the committee’s report notes that Brown has no direct investments in any of the 10 companies listed for divestment, and very small exposure in indirect investments, which are funds managed by external parties, and whose investment decisions the University does not control. Moynihan and Paxson wrote, “ACURM’s analysis shows that, based on data from June 30, 2023, Brown’s indirect investments in the 10 companies represent only 0.009% (i.e., nine-thousandths of one percent) of their aggregate market value.”
The Corporation agreed with an assessment in the ACURM report that divestment would serve as a symbolic political statement. ACURM’s report stated: “The Committee determined that this investment is de minimis and the majority believes it is too distantly removed from ‘social harm’ to thus justify divestment action. The majority believes that divestment would be a symbolic political statement, and therefore that the requirement of ‘social harm’ as defined in the ACURM Charge is not satisfied.”
Moynihan and Paxson said the Corporation also focused on the fact that divestment would have a significant impact on the ability of Brown to fulfill its mission to discover, communicate and preserve knowledge.
“Brown’s mission doesn’t encompass resolving or adjudicating global conflict…” they wrote. “Our greatest contribution to the cause of peace for which so many members of the community have advocated is to continue to educate future leaders and produce scholarship that informs and supports their work. A decision to divest would greatly jeopardize our ability to continue to make this contribution. If the Corporation were to divest, it would signal to our students and scholars that there are ‘approved’ points of view to which members of the community are expected to conform. This would be wholly inconsistent with the principles of academic freedom and free inquiry, and would undermine our mission of serving the community, the nation and the world.”
A long-standing and comprehensive process
The vote by the Corporation concludes a long-standing process Brown has followed since the 1970s, through which any member of its community can submit a divestment proposal for consideration. In July, the student-led Brown Divest Coalition submitted its divestment proposal to ACURM, which is advisory to the president while operating independently from Brown’s senior administration and Corporation.
In a Sept. 30 report submitted to Paxson, ACURM recommended against divestment by a vote of 8 to 2, with 1 abstention. The committee’s report considered a wide range of perspectives, informed by presentations from students in support of and in opposition to divestment, thousands of written submissions from multiple parties, and numerous perspectives expressed at open sessions by members of the Brown community.