3) Options for next steps on building names

3.1 This section of the report considers the options for removing or retaining the names of the University’s buildings and describes the process by which a determination can be made.

3.2 The report refers to ‘denaming’, which describes the process of removing an existing name from a building and separates it from the process of determining a new name. For simplicity, the usual term used is ‘renaming’, but this term implicitly recognises the two separate acts of denaming and naming. In practical terms, denamed buildings may assume a simple address derived from the street name. In some cases (e.g. University buildings on Tyndall Avenue or Colston Street), this may not be desirable and it may be determined that buildings require renaming also.

The five options considered are:

  1. Dename and/or rename all buildings named for individuals connected with the Transatlantic trafficking of enslaved Africans.
  2. Dename and/or rename some buildings named for individuals connected with the Transatlantic trafficking of enslaved Africans, employing a ‘case-by-case’ or principles-led process used to determine which buildings are to be de/renamed.
  3. Dename and/or rename some or all buildings with inclusion of additional information on historical links and/or contemporary legacy.
  4. Do not dename or rename any buildings but include information on historical links and/or contemporary legacies.
  5. Do not dename or rename any buildings (‘as is’ option). These options are placed into a matrix format in fig 6.

The options have been considered against each of the main points of view that the qualitative analysis identified in the survey and an assessment is made on the degree to which each of these points of view would be aligned to a general position on renaming buildings.

Matrix showing options for renaming against main points of view surveyed. There is a link to the full-size version of the image and a link to the full text in the caption.
Figure 6: Options for renaming against main points of view surveyed.
View image full size (opens in new tab).
View image as text.

3.3 Applying University of Bristol Renaming Principles

The matrix in Fig. 7 considers the individuals, families and bodies connected to the building names within the scope of the consultation against the University’s principles on Renaming, (see section 1.3). This provides a more detailed understanding of the similarities and differences between each case, and how these relate to the Renaming Principles. Applying the principles provides no definitive conclusions but should help guide decision-making.

There are a few additional points to make about the application of the Renaming Principles. Firstly, there are subjective elements within the principles, including the identification of an individual’s ‘principal legacy’, or the degree to which a building named for them helps in the formation of community within the University. The current responses provided in the Legacies of Slavery report reflect that subjectivity and may be challenged and interrogated.

In addition, the principles seek to systematise the process of determining whether a building name should change and so are not necessarily designed to understand the emotional impact – positive or negative - of the continued presence of particular individuals within the University’s symbols and building names.

The matrix in Fig. 7 does not consider the first principle: that is, a ‘strong presumption against renaming…according to the values of the namesake’, and the weight this principle should be given in overall determination. This is a matter for the University Executive Board. The principles make clear however that renaming should be an 'exceptional event’, particularly where ‘a building has been named for someone who made a major contribution to the University.’ There are differences between major donors such as Wills and Fry - families that indisputably made a major contribution to the University - and Goldney in this respect.

The University should determine the relative weight it gives to the consultation process, Renaming Principles and research in its decision-making. All should be considered evidential factors, guiding the decision-making process. However, there are other factors that may require consideration, including:

3.3.1 Financial implications

The practicalities associated with renaming a building are costly. Some responses in the consultation from students, faculty, alumni and the wider community questioned the use of university funds in such an endeavour, where such funds might be used for other programmes they considered more important, such as tackling contemporary inequality of opportunity in the city. Others contend that funds need to be made available for a range of anti-racism and reparative justice measures, from renaming to decolonising the curriculum to community projects.

Matrix showing the relationship between the Renaming Principles, the consultation and other considerations. There is a link to the full-size version of the image in the caption. The full text from the matrix accompanies the image.
Figure 7: The relationship between the Renaming Principles, the consultation and other considerations.
View image full size (opens in new tab).

Content from the matrix table (figure 7).

3.3.2 Opportunity cost

Where younger generations and current members of the University are more likely to show support for renaming, older people, including Alumni are less likely. Comments received from Alumni suggest that Alumni donations to the University may be negatively impacted by renaming. An alternative view is that a building renaming process may be an opportunity to attract a significant donation.

3.3.3 Existing relationships

The University operates in a broader city-wide context, and as a Civic University is committed to ensuring its operation contributes positively to life in the city in general. In reality this means that the institution maintains a networks of partnerships in the community, as education provider, research body, funder, as a beneficiary of funds, as a landlord, developer, and project delivery agency across the city. The decision on building renaming should be considered in light of the positive and negative impact on this network of partnerships and relationships in the broader community.

3.3.4 Future relationships

The University may wish to consider whether prospective students, and particularly those from Black communities, may be deterred from attending the University if they perceive the response to this exercise has been mishandled in any way, or indeed whether the University projects a sufficiently safe and welcoming environment in its maintenance of existing symbols and building names.

3.3.5 Pre-existing legal agreements, naming rights etc

The University has consulted its legal team and has established that there are no extant legal restrictions preventing it from renaming any building.

Edit this page