����ֱ��

For Enrique Santamaria Echeverria, the decision to study law came from a desire to combine disciplines. Political science, economics, history, all of them fascinated him. Law, he felt, offered a little of everything. “I had to choose between law and economics,” he recalls. “I even applied to study economics in France, but my French wasn’t strong enough. So, I stayed in Colombia and studied law.”

Today, Enrique is an assistant professor at the Department of Law & Markets at Erasmus School of Law. His research sits at the intersection of law, digital technologies and health, focusing on how legal frameworks can be designed to support fair and collective governance of data. He is also a member of the SSH Sector Plan and The Public-Private Challenge, a collaborative research programme aimed at rethinking how public and private interests are regulated, itself part of the sector plan for Law.

A researcher who likes to feel ‘free’

After completing his Master’s in International and Comparative Private Law at the university of Groningen, Enrique stayed in the Netherlands to pursue his PhD. “I wanted to be somewhere that gave me the freedom to follow my own ideas,” he says. That freedom, both intellectual and institutional, became a guiding principle in his academic work.

He describes himself, playfully, as someone with “promiscuous academic interests.” “I’ve been told I’m in the wrong department,” he jokes, “but I like that. I enjoy working at the intersections, with colleagues from different disciplines and faculties. My position allows for that, and it’s something I value deeply.”

His work in the sector plan Law and The Public-Private Challenge puts that interdisciplinarity into practice. Much of his current research centres on data governance and data cooperatives: how people collectively manage and decide on the use of sensitive data, especially in health contexts. He examines how public interests are defined and protected within private relationships, often drawing from theories of solidarity and the commons.

In his recent work, Enrique studied new European laws, like the European Health Data Space, to explore how we might handle sensitive data differently in the future. Right now, data-sharing mostly depends on each person's individual consent. Enrique thinks we might start treating certain types of data, like health information, as something valuable to everyone—without losing sight of the fact that your personal data should always remain yours. He looks at ways laws could allow communities to safely share and manage this data together, balancing individual privacy with collective benefits. Enrique puts it simply: "I'm interested in how laws can help communities manage data responsibly, especially when it's as personal and powerful as health information."

“Some research is valuable even if nobody reads it”

When asked what drives him, Enrique doesn’t hesitate: “As academics - we’re not in this for the money,” he says. “We’re here because we care about knowledge.” But he’s also reflective about the broader forces shaping academia today, including the increasing pressure to demonstrate ‘impact.’

“I’m ambivalent about that term,” he says. “Of course, impact matters. But I don’t think it should be the only thing. Some research is valuable even if nobody reads it. The pursuit of knowledge, done seriously and freely, is meaningful in itself.”

For Enrique, academic freedom is not just a principle, it’s a necessity. “Many of us went into research because we have stubborn characters,” he says with a smile. “We don’t want to be told what to do. We want to follow our own questions. That freedom should be protected.”

Good news and a look ahead

Enrique recently received good news: he has been awarded an NWO Veni grant for his research on collective decision-making in the use of health data. In his project Collective Governance of Health Data: Towards More Democratic and Inclusive Models, he explores how individuals and institutions can jointly determine how such data are used in a fair and inclusive way. “This project builds on my earlier research,” he explains, “but it also responds to a growing public debate about the use of health data for research and algorithmic training. The increasing impact of digitalisation raises important questions: who has the power to decide how health data are used, and under what conditions? Should these decisions rest with individuals, companies, or governments?” Additionally, there was good news from the wider faculty context: following the positive final evaluation of the Sector Plan for Law, it was decided that part of the funding would be made structural.

Our business? “Maybe it could be each other”

When asked about the faculty’s slogan, Enrique chooses his words carefully. “I think it’s fine,” he says. “But it doesn’t fit everyone. And that’s okay.” He points out that ‘business’ doesn’t always mean working with the private sector, sometimes it means studying it critically. “Maybe we should talk more about what meets actually means. Does it mean collaboration? Observation? Challenge? It should be open to interpretation.”

He’s clear that he feels the slogan shouldn’t be forced to apply universally. “Not everyone needs to fit the frame. As long as researchers have the freedom to define their own focus, it can work.”

At the end of our conversation, Enrique offers another, more quiet reflection, one that ties together his personal drive with our slogan. “Maybe that could be our business,” he says, “talking to each other.” He means not just within departments, but across them. Across disciplines, perspectives, and personalities. “I’d love for us to talk more. It’s how we challenge assumptions, and how we strengthen our academic community,” Enrique concludes. “If we want to keep learning, we have to keep listening - to each other.”